Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite In Re Byrd, 75 So. 2d 331.

13 citing documents.

In Re: Daniel Hamilton McCarthy Applying for Intrafamily Adoption of G.M.V. La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2021
Adoption has been described as a creature of statute, such that all statutory requirements must be strictly carried out, (1954).
In re the Successions of Lain 147 So. 3d 1204 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2014
In Re TML 951 So. 2d 364 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
In re T.M.L. 951 So. 2d 364 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
In Re Shavor 428 So. 2d 952 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
While originally consent had to be continuing up until the time of the final decree of adoption, , (1954), this was amended to require continued consent only until the entry of the interlocutory decree.
Moreland v. Craft 244 So. 2d 37 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1971
The first case in point by our Supreme Court after the 1948 amendment was , (1954).
Roy v. Speer 192 So. 2d 554 La. 1966
See, also, , ; Madere v. Long, 231 La.
Roy v. Speer 184 So. 2d 796 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1966
1 , , , , and Green v. Paul, 212 La.
In Re Hughes 176 So. 2d 158 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1965
The necessity for continuing consent was reaffirmed in , (1954), and Madere v. Long, 231 La.
In re Adoption of Meier 169 So. 2d 583 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1964
In re Adoption of Gordon 135 So. 2d 673 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1961
1 , ; , ; Green v. Paul, 212 La.
In Re Harville 96 So. 2d 20 La. 1957
337 , , and , 75 So.2d.331, and dismissed the adoption proceeding.
Madere v. Long 91 So. 2d 771 La. 1956
The facts of the case of In re Byrd, applying for adoption, , , are not identical to those herein involved, but the case is authority for the rule that consent of the natural parents is necessary for the adoption of their child.