Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19, § 532 (2026)

Consent for adoptions

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(REPEALED)

SECTION HISTORY

PL 1967, c. 432, §§2,3 (AMD). PL 1969, c. 370 (AMD). PL 1969, c. 437, §§3,4 (AMD). PL 1973, c. 791, §1 (AMD). PL 1975, c. 293, §4 (AMD). PL 1977, c. 515, §1 (AMD). PL 1979, c. 325, §1 (AMD). PL 1979, c. 391 (RPR). PL 1979, c. 733, §9 (AMD). PL 1981, c. 369, §§1-4 (AMD). PL 1981, c. 456, §A63 (AMD). PL 1981, c. 470, §A44 (AMD). PL 1987, c. 87 (AMD). PL 1991, c. 369, §§1-3 (AMD). PL 1993, c. 686, §3 (RP). PL 1993, c. 686, §13 (AFF).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 9 cases, 1965–1991 · leading case: In Re Melissa C., 516 A.2d 946 (Me. 1986).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

In Re Melissa C., 516 A.2d 946 (Me. 1986). · cites it 8× “The department moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that its consent was required under 19 M.R.S.A. § 532(1)(C) (1981), [1] but the court denied the motion.”

In Re Christopher J., 505 A.2d 795 (Me. 1986). · cites it 4× “" (Emphasis added) Sybil contends that because the adoption statute, 19 M.R.S.A. § 532 (1981), requires children 14 years of age and older to consent in writing before they are adopted, the parental rights termination statute must also be read to contain such a requirement.”

In Re Swan, 569 A.2d 1202 (Me. 1990). · cites it 2× “1989) (statutory rape only under age 14); 19 M.R.S.A. § 532 (1981) (consent to adoption at age 14); 29 M.”

Nesiba v. Taylor, 433 A.2d 720 (Me. 1981). · cites it 5× “” When the Nesibas filed their petitions, the necessity for obtaining the natural 1 parent’s consent to adoption was controlled by 19 M.R.S.A. § 532 (1964), as last amended by P.”

Porter v. Hoffman, 592 A.2d 482 (Me. 1991). · cites it 2× “Because we find that the statutory adoption procedures of 19 M.R.S.A. § 532 (1981 & Supp.1990) were adequately complied with and because we do not find that these procedures effect a denial of due process or equal protection, we affirm the decision of the Probate Court.”

In re Adoption of G., 502 A.2d 1044 (Me. 1986). · cites it 2× “19 M.R.S.A. § 532(2)(B) (1981). . An investigation by the Department of Human Services must be completed before an adoption may be decreed if the adoptive parents are not blood relatives of the child to be adopted.”

Adoption of G., 529 A.2d 809 (Me. 1987). · cites it 2× “19 M.R.S.A. § 532 (1981) provides as follows: 1.”

In re Bich Thi Nguyen, 407 A.2d 1122 (Me. 1979). “The applicable adoption consent statute, 19 M.R.S.A. § 532 (Supp.1978), 2 required prior consent to any adoption by one of the following: the child’s parent or parents; and if no parents, then a person or agency having custody of the child or the child’s legal guardian; and if…”

St. Clair v. Est. of Edwards, 210 A.2d 17 (Me. 1965). “19 M.R.S.A. § 532. The petition for adoption reads: “To the Honorable, the Judge of the Probate Court in and for the County of Oxford: “RESPECTFULLY REPRESENTS, Fred L.”

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19, § 532(1)(C) — 1 case

In Re Melissa C., 516 A.2d 946 (Me. 1986). “The department moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that its consent was required under 19 M.R.S.A. § 532(1)(C) (1981), [1] but the court denied the motion.”

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19, § 532(2)(B) — 1 case

In re Adoption of G., 502 A.2d 1044 (Me. 1986). “19 M.R.S.A. § 532(2)(B) (1981). . An investigation by the Department of Human Services must be completed before an adoption may be decreed if the adoptive parents are not blood relatives of the child to be adopted.”

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19, § 532(4) — 3 cases

Porter v. Hoffman, 592 A.2d 482 (Me. 1991). “Because we find that the statutory adoption procedures of 19 M.R.S.A. § 532 (1981 & Supp.1990) were adequately complied with and because we do not find that these procedures effect a denial of due process or equal protection, we affirm the decision of the Probate Court.”

Adoption of G., 529 A.2d 809 (Me. 1987). “19 M.R.S.A. § 532 (1981) provides as follows: 1.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.