Next up adoption agency’s defense

State rests case against 2 of staff

State attorneys concluded their deceptive-trade-practices case against an operator of a defunct Little Rock adoption agency with the testimony Wednesday of an ex-client who denounced Adoption Advantage as “evil,” saying it cheated her with the promise of a baby who was not the agency’s to give away.

The Arkansas attorney general’s office sued the agency, owner Ed Webb, his ex-wife Donna Gail Hight and a former employee, Jacklyn Potter, in 2010, claiming they’d cheated more than a dozen clients by promising to provide them children to adopt, then never delivering. Webb surrendered his adoption license in a March 2009 public hearing under pressure by regulators examining his business practices. His whereabouts areunknown.

State lawyers are proceeding against Hight, 46, and Potter, 55, after winning a 2011 default judgment against Webb and Adoption Advantage when they failed to respond to the suit. Proceedings before Circuit Judge Mackie Pierce resume at 9 a.m. today with the defense presenting its side. Hight will testify today.

After three days of trial and the testimony of 17 angry former clients, Assistant Attorney General Cathi Compton rested her case by showing jurors the video-recorded deposition of Mary Harkins, a Virginia lawyer.

Harkins, with her physician husband, hired Adoption Advantage in September 2008 on Webb’s promise that he would provide the family a baby who would be born in two months. Harkins testified that Webb told her that the child would be from an 18-yearold pregnant Texas woman and that all Harkins needed to do to get the child was pay the agency $36,400 and sign a contract.

She did all that, emptying her savings to pay, said Harkins. But almost as soon as the money changed hands, Webb and Potter turned evasive, frequently ignoring her phone calls and e-mails, Harkins said.

She said she had to learnthrough a third party that the adoption wouldn’t happen, and, launching her own investigation, she learned that the pregnant woman Webb claimed to be representing had never been a client of the agency and had actually rejected Adoption Advantage. Webb and Potter knew the child would not be available when she paid her money, Harkins said, but never told her during the three weeks she was involved with them. The experience was emotionally wrenching, she said.

“It’s still hard for me to believe anyone could be this evil,” Harkins said. “For somebody to be this evil, this hateful … to take somebody’s hopes and dreams, not only their money, it devastated me for a long time.”

In a federal lawsuit, Harkins won a 2009 judgment ordering Webb, Potter, the agency and two other employees, Shey Davis and Emily Gulledge, to repay her, but the money remains outstanding, court filings show.

The past two days have featured emotional testimony from former clients, including Gail Fuller of Romance,who testified Wednesday that she and her husband paid Adoption Advantage $28,900 in 2005 to adopt a daughter. Years of fertility treatments had produced only one pregnancy with a baby the couple named Hannah who died at birth, Fuller said. She said she turned to Adoption Advantage when she was 42 and her husband was 51 and Hight welcomed her when other agencies discouraged the couple because of their ages.

But the agency never provided a suitable match in almost four years and eventually broke off contact, Fuller said.

“You wonder if you’ll ever have life in your house. You wonder if you’ll ever hear little footsteps in your hall running to greet you. You wonder if you’ll die alone,” she said.

State attorneys have focused their case on Hightbecause they contend she co-owned the agency with Webb, whom she divorced in 2009 after 22 years of marriage and seven children. If the state can prove Hight helped control the agency, she can be held liable for any wrongdoing attributed to it by the jury, up to $10,000 per violation.

Hight’s attorney, Marcia Barnes, has worked to counter the emotional barrage by persistently questioning her client’s accusers about the terms of their contract, which specifically states that the agency does not guarantee an adoption and that its fees are not refundable. She has emphasized the “controlling” role that birth mothers have in ending the process, sometimes at the last minute, pointing out that they can reclaim a child within 10 days of surrendering it.

Northwest Arkansas, Pages 7 on 04/25/2013

Upcoming Events