The question in this case is whether Surrogates Court had discretion to grant an adoption without the adoptee’s consent.
Domestic Relations Law (DRL) § 111(1)(a) typically requires an adoptee who is over 14 years of age to consent to their own adoption. The DRL, however, states that an adoptee’s consent may be excused if “the judge or surrogate in his discretion dispenses with such consent.”
In this case, petitioners, who operate a family care home, sought to adopt respondent, a 64-year-old resident of the home with a “profound” intellectual disability who could not legally provide consent. Surrogates Court dispensed with respondent’s consent and granted the adoption petition, finding the adoption to be in respondent’s best interests.
MHLS pursued an appeal on respondent’s behalf, and the Third Department affirmed. The court held that Domestic Relations Law § 111(1)(a) gave Surrogates Court express authority to waive respondent’s consent. Any such decision, the court explained, should be based on the same best-interests assessment required to grant an adoption. And the court agreed with Surrogates Court’s assessment that the adoption in this case was in respondent’s best interests.
The Court of Appeals granted respondent leave to appeal.
Return to the case page for Matter of Marian T.