## Facts

- Otakar Kirchner and Daniella Janikova, unmarried, planned to marry; Janikova became pregnant with their son, Richard.
- Before the birth, Kirchner traveled abroad for a family emergency.
- While Kirchner was away, Janikova gave birth and placed Richard for adoption without notifying Kirchner.
- Janikova, with the adoptive parents’ knowledge and participation, falsely told Kirchner the baby had died; the adoptive parents knew Kirchner was the father and had not consented.
- After learning the child was alive and adopted, Kirchner promptly initiated litigation to establish his parental rights and obtain custody.
- The trial court terminated Kirchner’s parental rights on an “unfitness” finding based largely on his lack of involvement during the first 30 days after birth and permitted the adoption; the appellate court affirmed.
- The Illinois Supreme Court later vacated the adoption, concluding Kirchner’s parental rights had not been lawfully terminated.
- After vacatur, the adoptive parents refused to surrender the child and sought a post-vacatur custody proceeding under a statute calling for a “best interests of the child” hearing; Kirchner sought an original writ of habeas corpus from the Illinois Supreme Court for immediate custody.

## Issues

1. Whether, after an adoption is vacated and the biological father’s parental rights are intact, the State may require a “best interests of the child” custody hearing between the fit legal parent and third parties.
2. Whether applying a post-vacatur best-interests statute to allow third parties to retain custody over a fit, non-consenting parent violates due process protections for parental custody.

## Decision

- The Illinois Supreme Court granted Kirchner’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
- The court held that, once the adoption was vacated, Kirchner’s parental rights remained intact and he was the child’s sole legal parent.
- The court ordered that physical custody be transferred immediately to Kirchner.
- The court rejected using a post-vacatur “best interests” hearing to allow the adoptive parents, as non-parents, to keep custody against a fit legal parent.

## Legal Principles

- A fit parent’s right to the care, custody, and control of a child is a fundamental liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause.
- When a parent has not consented to adoption and parental rights have not been lawfully terminated, the State may not treat custody as a free-standing contest between that parent and third parties based only on a best-interests balancing.
- A best-interests standard may not be used to achieve the practical equivalent of involuntary termination without the required substantive and procedural protections.
- Statutes governing post-vacatur custody determinations must be construed consistently with constitutional limits; they cannot be applied to defeat the superior custody claim of a fit legal parent in favor of non-parents.
- A parent’s temporary absence or delay in asserting rights cannot support loss of parental status where that delay was caused by deliberate deception preventing timely involvement.

## Conclusion

The court ordered immediate return of the child to his fit biological father after concluding the adoption was void and the father’s rights had never been properly terminated; due process barred a post-vacatur best-interests hearing that would allow non-parents to retain custody over the sole legal parent.


In re Kirchner, 649 N.E.2d 324 (Ill. 1995)