An adult adoption
involving lesbian partners and a claim to a share of a
family fortune built on IBM has been annulled, bouncing the
case to Maine's highest court.
At issue is
whether it was legal for a judge to allow Olive Watson to
adopt Patricia Spado in 1991 in Knox County, where the
longtime partners spent several weeks each summer on
an island in Penobscot Bay.
Watson was a
daughter of Thomas Watson Jr., who took International
Business Machines Corp. from punch cards into electronic
computing.
The relationship
between Spado and Watson ended a year after the adoption
was approved, and in 2005 -- after Thomas Watson and his
wife had both died -- the adoption was challenged in
court by other heirs to the Watson fortune.
After Thomas
Watson and his wife died, their grandchildren became
eligible for cash payouts, and Spado claimed the adoption
made her a beneficiary.
The probate judge
who granted the adoption granted the heirs' petition
and annulled it on a residency issue on April 24, but her
sealed ruling didn't come to light until an appeal
brief was filed with the state supreme court, the
Maine supreme judicial court. In Maine adoption
records are confidential, even though the women were in
their 40s when the adoption took place.
Spado and Olive
Watson had lived together for 14 years before their
breakup, spending only five nights apart. Under their
separation agreement, Watson paid her ex-partner about
$500,000 in exchange for relinquishing her claim to
certain real estate.
The settlement,
however, was apparently not intended to terminate Spado's
rights to inheritance as a granddaughter. Her court filings
contain a letter signed by Watson after the breakup in
which she says, "I shall at no time initiate any
action to revoke or annul my adoption of you."
Gay rights
activists say the case shows the lengths to which same-sex
couples would go to ensure a partner's financial security in
the days before they were allowed to form civil unions
or to marry.
Olive Watson and
Spado had been living in New York at the time of the
adoption, but that state barred the adoption of a gay
partner.
Maine law
required that the adoptee had to "live" in the state
and the adopting parent had to "reside" there, but the
state's adoption law does not specifically define
either term. During their 14 years together, Spado and
Watson spent several weeks each summer at Watson's
home at her family's compound on North Haven Island, known
as Oak Hill.
In their legal
appeal brief, Spado's lawyers argue against annulling an
adoption that had been allowed to stand for so long on the
basis of undefined domicile requirements.
"Most disturbing,
this challenge can come not just in a direct appeal,
but at any time, even decades later, in a collateral attack
long after final judgment and longstanding reliance on
the adoption," the brief stated.
Even though the
heirs reached their goal of annulling the adoption, they
also are appealing in a bid to broaden the foundation of
their case. Their attorney, Stephen Hanscom, plans to
argue that the adoption should also have been annulled
on other grounds: that it was obtained by two partners
seeking to manufacture inheritance rights and that they did
not intend to establish a normal parent-child
relationship.
Hanscom plans to
file his legal brief at the end of the month.
The Maine supreme
judicial court is likely to hear arguments on the
appeals this fall. (Jerry Harkavy, AP)
