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: Application for the Guardianship, etc., JOSE RAMON V., A Dependent Child Under the Age of Eighteen Years, etc. Juan Raymond V., etc., Respondent-Appellant, The Salvation Army, Petitioner-Respondent.
Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Sara Schechter, J.), entered September 12, 1997, which, upon a finding of abandonment and permanent neglect, terminated the parental rights of respondent father and committed custody and guardianship of the subject child to the Commissioner of Social Services and petitioner Agency for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Family Court properly found that petitioner agency proved by clear and convincing evidence, including the testimony of the case worker assigned to the case during the relevant period of time and correspondence between the case worker and respondent father, that although able to do so, respondent failed to contact or visit his son for a period of more than six months immediately preceding the filing of the instant petition. The finding of abandonment pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b(4)(b) was accordingly justified. Also proper was Family Court's finding of permanent neglect pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b[7][a] since the record demonstrates with the requisite force that, despite the Agency's fulfillment of its statutory obligation diligently to encourage and strengthen the parent-child relationship, appellant failed within the statutorily relevant time frame to substantially and continuously maintain contact with his son or to plan for his son's future although physically and financially able to do so. The court's rejection, as not credible, of appellant's testimony concerning his purported contact with his son and his proposed plan to care for his son in the future had ample basis in the record and should not be disturbed on appeal (see, Matter of Irene O., 38 N.Y.2d 776, 777, 381 N.Y.S.2d 865, 345 N.E.2d 337; Matter of Charles Clarence C., 213 A.D.2d 294, 623 N.Y.S.2d 876).
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: September 28, 1999
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)