CONFLICT OF LAWS-ADOPTION-JURISDICTION

Authors

Abstract

Sociologists treat of the subject of adoption very sparsely. It is but a desired end in their work, and having its foundation in law, yields but slightly to sociological supervision. However, there exist many reports and treatises in the field of child placement and the effect thereof on the child. The most cursory examination of these works reveals that from the social point of view, at least, the work is conducted with but one end in view, i. e., the welfare of the child. Adoption, as a means to this end, has the same reason for its foundation. To this extent the cases, and in many states the statutes, lend their support. See 22 COL.. L. REV. 332, 338 note; Succession of Caldwell, 114 La. 195, 38 So. 140; Brewer v. Browning, 115 Miss. 358, 76 So. 267, 519; Rizo v. Burruel, 23 Ariz. 137, 202 Pac. 234; Appeal of Wolf, (Pa.) 13 Atl. 760; TIFFANY ON DOMESTIC RELATIONS, ,3rd ed., sec. 115 ff; Sec. 2, Chapt. 85 LAWS OF 1917, OF NEW MEXICO; 2 BlRDSEYE. CONSOLIDATED LAWS OF NEW YORK, Sec. 113.

Recommended Citation

CONFLICT OF LAWS-ADOPTION-JURISDICTION, 24 Mich. L. Rev. 486 (1926).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol24/iss5/6