IN RE: THE ADOPTION OF C.M.C. (2024)

Justice Ingrid Gustafson delivered the Opinion of the Court.

¶1 Pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(c), Montana Supreme Court Internal Operating Rules, this case is decided by memorandum opinion and shall not be cited and does not serve as precedent. Its case title, cause number, and disposition shall be included in this Court's quarterly list of noncitable cases published in the Pacific Reporter and Montana Reports.

¶2 Cherri Staggs f/k/a Cherri Tumbleson appeals from the July 6, 2023 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decree of Adoption issued by the Eighteenth Judicial District, Gallatin County. From our review of the record, we find no reversible error on the part of the District Court.

¶3 We have determined to decide this case pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(c) of our Internal Operating Rules, which provides for memorandum opinions. In the opinion of the Court, the case presents a question controlled by settled law or by the clear application of applicable standards of review.

¶4 Affirmed.

Justice Beth Baker, concurring.

¶5 I concur. The District Court held an evidentiary hearing in this matter at which it heard disputed testimony from the parties. It made findings from the evidence in the record that the minor child desired and consented to the adoption and that Donald and Julia had met the requirements for termination of Cherri's parental rights and for Julia to adopt the child as his stepparent. When this Court reviews such a ruling, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the prevailing party, and we leave the credibility of witnesses and the weight assigned to their testimony for the determination of the trial court. Willis v. Fertterer, 2013 MT 282, ¶ 25, 372 Mont. 108, 310 P.3d 544 (citation omitted). Whether we would have reached the same decision as the trial court is not the standard under which we review the District Court's order. Woerner v. Woerner, 2014 MT 134, ¶ 29, 375 Mont. 153, 325 P.3d 1244. “We review whether substantial evidence in the record supports the court's findings regardless of whether the evidence could support a different outcome as well.” Woerner, ¶ 29 (citations omitted). Applying that standard here, I agree to affirm the District Court's determination.

Chief Justice Mike McGrath joins the Concurrence of Justice Beth Baker.

INGRID GUSTAFSON

We concur: MIKE McGRATH JAMES JEREMIAH SHEA BETH BAKER JIM RICE