In re J.A.B

10 Citing cases

  1. In re E.A.

    125,994 (Kan. Ct. App. Apr. 5, 2024)

    But this court has held an entitlement to notice alone does not equate to standing. In re Adoption of J.A.B., 26 Kan.App.2d 959, 968-69, 997 P.2d 98 (2000). Consent to an independent adoption shall be given by:

  2. In re D.R.W.

    362 P.3d 1124 (Kan. Ct. App. 2015)

    Moreover, when consent to adoption is properly acknowledged, such acknowledgement serves as prima facie proof that the written consent was freely and voluntarily given, and the consenting parent must show fraud, duress, undue influence, mistake, or lack of understanding to rebut the presumption. In re Adoption of Trent, 229 Kan. 224, 228, 624 P.2d 433 (1981); In re Adoption of J.A.B., 26 Kan.App.2d 959, 966, 997 P.2d 98 (2000). The record reveals that substantial competent evidence supports the district court's finding that Mother gave a knowing and voluntary consent.

  3. In re Adoption of Baby Girl T

    28 Kan. App. 2d 712 (Kan. Ct. App. 2001)   Cited 5 times

    Substantial evidence possesses both relevance and substance, furnishing an adequate basis of fact from which the legal conclusions may be drawn. See In re J.A.B., 26 Kan.App.2d 959, 961, 997 P.2d 98 (2000).          Here, the birth mother attempts to dissect the voluntariness arguments by distinguishing the conduct of the adoptive parents and her coercive home environment from the conduct of attorney J.B.A. as a basis for revoking her consent.

  4. Winters v. Kansas Department of Social

    Case No. 10-2181-JAR-DJW (D. Kan. Jan. 19, 2011)   Cited 16 times

    Id.; In re Adoption of J.A.B., 997 P.2d 98, 105 (Kan. Ct. App. 2000) ("A grandparent's rights in an adoption of a grandchild are purely the province of statute. A grandparent has no natural or common-law rights to grandchildren.").

  5. In re T.M.M.H.

    307 Kan. 902 (Kan. 2018)   Cited 109 times
    Holding that a point raised without pertinent authority or without analysis explaining why it is sound despite a lack of supporting authority is inadequately briefed and thus abandoned

    The court rejected Grandmother's position that she was a permanent legal custodian, finding the only basis for awarding such status is the Kansas Code for Care of Children, specifically K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 38-2272. The court ruled its decision was controlled by Browning v. Tarwater , 215 Kan. 501, 524 P.2d 1135 (1974) (grandmother not an interested party, not entitled to notice of stepparent adoption), and In re Adoption of J.A.B. , 26 Kan. App. 2d 959, 969, 997 P.2d 98 (2000) (no error in district court holding grandparent had standing to participate in adoption proceeding solely on issue of visitation but "grandparents' rights in the adoption proceeding are limited to a determination of whether reasonable visitation should be granted"). Grandmother appealed, and the Court of Appeals affirmed the district court.

  6. In re B.H.

    550 P.3d 1274 (Kan. Ct. App. 2024)

    Of course, a court has substantial discretion in controlling the proceedings before it, which includes the discretion to decide whether to grant a request for a continuance. See In re Adoption of J.A.B., 26 Kan. App. 2d 969, 964, 997 P.2d 98 (2000). [38–40]And yet, the district court’s discretion in whether to grant a continuance "is bound by due process requirements that interested parties be afforded an opportunity to present their objections, which includes a reasonable time to prepare a defense to the litigation.

  7. In re K.B.

    125,601 (Kan. Ct. App. Apr. 28, 2023)

    The district court has substantial discretion in controlling the proceedings before it, which includes the discretion to decide whether to grant a request for a continuance. See In re Adoption of J.A.B., 26 Kan.App.2d 959, 964, 997 P.2d 98 (2000). We review the district court's decision for abuse of discretion and reverse "'only when no reasonable person would take the view adopted by the district court.'"

  8. In re I.B.

    125,394 (Kan. Ct. App. Feb. 24, 2023)

    The district court has substantial discretion in controlling the proceedings before it, which includes the discretion to decide whether to grant a request for a continuance. See In re Adoption of J.A.B., 26 Kan.App.2d 959, 964, 997 P.2d 98 (2000). We review the district court's decision for abuse of discretion and reverse "'only when no reasonable person would take the view adopted by the district court.'"

  9. In re D.S.

    124,563 (Kan. Ct. App. Oct. 21, 2022)

    Additionally, apart from that due process review, this court reviews a district court's denial of a motion for continuance for an abuse of discretion. In re Adoption of J.A.B., 26 Kan.App.2d 959, 964, 997 P.2d 98 (2000). A judicial action constitutes an abuse of discretion if (1) no reasonable person would take the view adopted by the trial court; (2) it is based on an error of law; or (3) it is based on an error of fact.

  10. In re A.A

    38 Kan. App. 2d 1100 (Kan. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 57 times

    We review those decisions for abuse of discretion and reverse only if no reasonable person would take the view adopted by the district court. In re Adoption of J.A.B., 26 Kan.App.2d 959, 964, 997 P.2d 98 (2000).          Vickie's attorney asked for a continuance of the June 4 hearing based on his statement that he did not receive the State's motion to terminate parental rights until May 22. How this might have occurred is not clear.