# In Re the Adoption of S.J.B.

> Supreme Court of Arkansas · February 29, 1988 · 294 Ark. 598

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9779192

## Case

- **Full name:** In THE MATTER OF THE ADOPTION OF S.J.B., a Minor D.J.B. and K.B.B., Adoption Services, Inc., Et Al., Appellants
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Arkansas
- **Decided:** February 29, 1988
- **Citations:** 294 Ark. 598; 745 S.W.2d 606; 1988 Ark. LEXIS 140
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Dudley
- **Judges:** Purtle, Holt, Glaze, Dudley, Newbern
- **Cited by:** 19 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Red flag:** Superseded by statute, as recognized in R.N. v. J.M..
- Negative treatments: 1
- Distinguished by: 0
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9779192

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that an unmarried father lacking any substantial relationship with his child is not entitled to notice of the adoption proceeding under the Due Process Clause or the Equal Protection Clause

## Opinion text

Robert H. Dudley, Justice, dissenting. There is no final order in this case as required by Ark. R. App. P. 2(a), and I would dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Accordingly, I dissent.
David Newbern, Justice, dissenting. I agree with the majority decision as to the merits of the case. However, I would not reach the merits because I would dismiss the appeal for lack of a final order. The probate court stayed the adoption pending a showing of notice to the putative father of the child to be adopted. An adoption may be appealed only if a final order has been entered, as in any other civil case. Ark. Code Ann. § 9-9-216 (1987); Ark. R. App. P. 2(a). While we have ruled that an interlocutory order of adoption qualifies as a final order if no subsequent hearing is required by the decree, In re Appeals from Adoption Orders, 277 Ark. 520 , 642 S.W.2d 573 (1982), here we do not have an interlocutory adoption order. The action is obviously still pending.
When there is no final order, this court lacks jurisdiction of the subject matter of the appeal, and we have a duty to raise the issue and dismiss the case. Hyatt v. City of Bentonville, 275 Ark. 210 , 628 S.W.2d 326 (1982); Roy v. International Multifoods Corp., 268 Ark. 958 , 597 S.W.2d 129 (1980).
I respectfully dissent.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9779192. Public record. Not legal advice.