## Facts

- A 15-year-old birth mother became pregnant and, after being unable to obtain an abortion, pursued adoption.
- A physician referred the birth mother and her mother to an attorney who arranged private adoptions.
- The birth mother initially wanted a closed adoption but, shortly after giving birth, stated she wanted an open adoption.
- The attorney told her it was too late to change to an open adoption and obtained her signature on relinquishment documents shortly after delivery.
- The attorney delivered the newborn to prospective adoptive parents the next day.
- The birth mother quickly regretted the relinquishment, requested the child’s return, and the attorney refused.
- The birth mother filed a habeas corpus petition seeking return of the child, alleging the relinquishment was invalid; the district court denied relief.

## Issues

1. Whether the birth mother’s private-placement relinquishment was voluntary, knowing, and intelligent so as to bar her prompt attempt to revoke consent and regain custody through habeas corpus.
2. Whether, before entry of an adoption decree, a private relinquishment fully extinguishes a natural parent’s custodial rights.
3. Whether prospective adoptive parents (or an intermediary holding the child) have a legally protected custody interest sufficient to defeat a natural parent’s claim when consent is promptly revoked and alleged to be involuntary.

## Decision

- The Nebraska Supreme Court reversed the denial of habeas relief.
- The court concluded the relinquishment was not effective as an irrevocable termination of the birth mother’s rights under the circumstances presented.
- The court recognized that, in a private placement, parental rights are not fully extinguished until entry of a final adoption decree.
- The court treated the birth mother’s prompt revocation and challenge to voluntariness as defeating any claim of a vested right to custody by the private placement.

## Legal Principles

- A relinquishment of parental rights in a private adoption must be voluntary, knowing, and intelligent to be legally effective against the natural parent.
- In private-placement adoptions, a relinquishment alone does not fully and finally sever the natural parent’s rights; final severance occurs upon entry of an adoption decree.
- When a relinquishment is promptly revoked and voluntariness is not established, the private placement lacks a superior custodial claim against the natural parent.
- In a habeas action by a natural parent to recover a child from a private placement, the threshold inquiry is the legal validity of termination or relinquishment; a best-interests comparison does not displace the natural parent’s superior right absent a valid severance of parental rights.

## Conclusion

The court required proof that a private-placement relinquishment was voluntary and informed and held that, before an adoption decree, an equivocal or promptly revoked relinquishment cannot be treated as irrevocably extinguishing a natural parent’s right to custody.


Yopp v. Batt, 467 N.W.2d 868 (Neb. 1991)