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: ALEXANDER S. and Another, Children Under the Age of Eighteen Years, etc., Lucy D., Respondent–Appellant, Administration for Children's Services, Petitioner–Respondent. Ronald S., Intervenor–Respondent.
Order of Fact Finding and Disposition, Supreme Court, New York County (Laura Visitación–Lewis, J.), entered May 16, 2006, which, upon a finding against respondent of neglect of the infant Alexander S., and of derivative neglect of the infant Charlotte S., ordered, inter alia, that respondent be placed under the supervision of petitioner Administration for Children's Services for a 12–month period, that her access to the children continue, for a 12–month period, to be supervised by the privately retained agency already in place, that she pay the lesser of $1,000 or 25 percent of the amount billed by that agency each month as her share of the costs of her supervised access, and that she continue in her psychotherapy and recommended medication regimen and sign releases for petitioner to obtain reports from her treating mental health professionals as to her compliance with the therapy and medication regimen, unanimously modified, on the facts, to delete any provision requiring further supervision of respondent or of her access to the children, any provision requiring respondent to pay the costs of supervision, and any provision requiring respondent to undergo psychiatric treatment, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.
There is adequate support in the record for the court's findings of neglect and derivative neglect (see Matter of Victoria CC., 256 A.D.2d 931, 681 N.Y.S.2d 870 [1998]; and see Matter of R./C. Children, 303 A.D.2d 172, 755 N.Y.S.2d 236 [2003] ).
However, the record does not support the court's determination that unsupervised visitation would be detrimental to the children (see Matter of Gainza v. Gainza, 24 A.D.3d 551, 808 N.Y.S.2d 296 [2005] ) and that continued supervision of respondent's visitation with her children is in their best interests (see Matter of Valerie Leonice T., 107 A.D.2d 327, 329, 487 N.Y.S.2d 10 [1985] ).
Nor does the record support the court's determination that respondent must continue to be supervised by petitioner and to undergo psychotherapy and medication.
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: April 19, 2007
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)