Vier v. Vier
In Vier v. Vier, 333 Ark. 89, 62 Ark. App. 89, 968 S.W.2d 657 (1998) the Court found that the trial court did not err in ordering an adoption when the appellant could not dispute the fact that he failed to communicate with his daughter for more than one year.
In that case, Vier acknowledged that he had not seen his daughter for more than one year. He also admitted that he did not attempt to have the appellee cited for contempt for denying him access to his daughter, or take other action to see his daughter. Also, the only evidence of contact was six attempted phone calls and one attempted letter.
The court found that it was significant that Vier never attempted to effect his visitation through legal intervention, and never apprised the trial court of any alleged interference with his visitation rights until nineteen months after his last visit with his daughter.