## Facts

- Debbie Groves was the birth mother of Laci Lee Groves, born June 5, 1990; the child lived with Groves until January 1994.
- Groves arranged for Lonn and Loralee Clark to adopt Laci through a social services agency, insisting on continued contact after adoption.
- On January 11 and January 14, 1994, Groves and the Clarks signed and notarized identical written agreements contemplating post-adoption visitation and telephone contact.
- Around January 28, 1994, Groves executed relinquishment and consent documents; the court terminated her parental rights on February 2, 1994.
- The court entered a final adoption decree on September 23, 1994; neither the termination proceeding nor the adoption decree referenced the visitation agreement.
- The Clarks allowed visitation and phone contact until June 1995, then stopped.
- Groves petitioned for specific performance of the visitation agreement; the district court treated the Clarks’ opposition as a summary judgment motion and held the agreement void as a matter of law under Mont. Code Ann. § 40-8-125 and prior precedent.
- Groves appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether a written, notarized post-adoption visitation agreement executed before termination of parental rights and before the final adoption decree is void as a matter of law under Montana adoption statutes.
2. Whether such an agreement may be enforced as a contract, and if so, whether enforcement is contingent on a best-interests-of-the-child determination.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed the grant of summary judgment.
- The Court held the district court erred by concluding the agreement was void as a matter of law.
- The Court remanded for the district court to determine whether enforcing the agreement would be in the child’s best interests.

## Legal Principles

- Adoption statutes that terminate a birth parent’s status-based rights upon a final decree do not automatically invalidate contractual obligations voluntarily assumed by adoptive parents before they acquired exclusive statutory rights.
- A pre-adoption, written, notarized post-adoption contact agreement may be treated as an enforceable contract if not prohibited by statute or public policy.
- Enforcement of any post-adoption visitation agreement is always contingent on a judicial determination that enforcement serves the child’s best interests; the existence of a contract does not displace the court’s responsibility to protect the child’s welfare.

## Conclusion

The court held that a birth mother’s pre-adoption written agreement for post-adoption contact is not automatically void after adoption; on remand, enforceability turns on whether enforcement is consistent with the child’s best interests.


Groves v. Clark, 920 P.2d 981 (Mont. 1996)