Skip to main content
· 6/14/2024

In re Adoption of B.M.M.

Citations

  • 2024 Ohio 2288

Syllabus

Putative father did not register with the putative father registry or otherwise establish a legal relationship with the child prior to petitioner-appellant's filing of a petition for adoption. Although putative father's paternity was subsequently established by DNA testing, he had not attained the status of one whose consent to the adoption was required at the time the petition was filed. The trial court erred in concluding that the contact and support provisions of R.C. 3107.07(A) applied to putative father. Petitioner established by clear and convincing evidence that putative father's consent to the adoption was not required. Judgment reversed and remanded.

Judges: Huffman

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.