Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: PATHJRIE J., etc., a Dependent Child Under the Age of Eighteen Years, etc., Nimeh J., Petitioner-Appellant, Administration for Children's Services, Respondent-Respondent. In re “Baby Girl” J., etc., a Dependent Child Under the Age of Eighteen Years, etc., Nadia J., Respondent-Appellant, Lutheran Social Services, Inc., Petitioner-Respondent.
Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Douglas E. Hoffman, J.), entered December 13, 2006, which terminated respondent mother's parental rights to her daughter upon her admission of permanent neglect, transferred custody and guardianship of the child to petitioner agency and the Commissioner of Social Services for the City of New York for the purpose of adoption, and denied respondent maternal grandmother's petition for custody of the child, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The mother failed to request a suspended judgment (see Matter of Latoya P., 308 A.D.2d 402, 764 N.Y.S.2d 428 [2003] ). In any event, a suspended judgment would deprive the child of a “permanent, nurturing family relationship” (Matter of Michael B., 80 N.Y.2d 299, 310, 590 N.Y.S.2d 60, 604 N.E.2d 122 [1992] ), and the determination that termination of her mother's parental rights was in the child's best interests was supported by a preponderance of the evidence showing that the child has thrived in the foster home in which she has lived virtually her entire life and that the foster mother desires to adopt her (see Matter of Violeta P., 45 A.D.3d 352, 845 N.Y.S.2d 278 [2007] ).
The determination that the child's best interests would not be served by granting the grandmother's custody petition was supported by a preponderance of the evidence indicating that the child had little, if any, relationship with the grandmother, whom she had seen only a few times in her life, that the grandmother knew little about her, failed to recognize her special needs, and did not understand the degree to which her visits caused the child emotional harm (see generally Eschbach v. Eschbach, 56 N.Y.2d 167, 171-173, 451 N.Y.S.2d 658, 436 N.E.2d 1260 [1982]; Matter of Marquis M., 304 A.D.2d 399, 756 N.Y.S.2d 851 [2003] ).
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: November 13, 2008
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)