Bello

Bello v. Los Angeles County Bureau of Adoptions

Good Law
1963 Cal. App. LEXIS 2534·215 Cal. App. 2d 554·30 Cal. Rptr. 387
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 30, 1963Civ. No. 26348California1,843 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Herndon, J.

By their appeal from the judgment denying their petition to adopt the minor child here involved, appellants present for our determination the narrow question whether the consent of the natural father is required in an adoption proceeding involving a child which has been legitimatized by the natural father in conformity with the provisions of sections 215 and 230 1 of the Civil Code.

The briefs before us indicate that the facts as stated in the reports of the Los Angeles County Bureau of Adoptions made to the trial court are accepted and are not in dispute. These reports disclose that the mother of the subject child has lived with its father since September 1958, although they have had “frequent separations of a day or two to several weeks.” On June 13, 1959, a child, not the subject child, was born as a result of this relationship. The subject child was born August 5, 1960. A third child was expected in September 1961.

However, from February 5, 1949, to March 9, 1960, the mother was legally married to one Paul Ah To who has resided throughout in Hawaii. 2 It is therefore apparent that *556 the first two children of the natural parents were born “illegitimate” in the sense that…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.