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: MARIAH C. P., a Child Under 18 Years of Age, etc., Mario P., Respondent–Appellant, v. The Children's Aid Society, Petitioner-Respondent.
Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Keith Brown, J.), entered on or about September 16, 2022, which, after a hearing, to the extent appealed from, upon a finding that respondent father had violated the terms of a suspended judgment, revoked the suspended judgment, terminated the father's parental rights to the subject child, and committed guardianship and custody of the child to petitioner agency and the Commissioner of Social Services for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
A preponderance of the evidence supports Family Court's finding that the father failed to comply with the terms of the suspended judgment (see Matter of Naethael Makai A. [Adwoa A.], 135 A.D.3d 438, 438, 22 N.Y.S.3d 426 [1st Dept. 2016]). Notwithstanding the father's efforts to comply with some of the terms of the judgment, the credible evidence adduced at the hearing established that he failed to visit the child regularly, submit to random toxicology screenings, attend the child's medical and educational appointments, stay in contact with the service providers, or prohibit unsupervised contact between the child and the mother during visits. In light of this evidence, Family Court properly determined that revocation of the suspended judgment and termination of the father's parenting rights to free the child for adoption by the foster mother were in the child's best interests, particularly given the length of time that the child has been in foster care (see Matter of Davontay Peter H. [Makeba H.], 127 A.D.3d 405, 405, 4 N.Y.S.3d 500 [1st Dept. 2015], lv denied 25 N.Y.3d 911, 2015 WL 3891628 [2015]).
A separate dispositional hearing was not required before terminating the father's parental rights. Family Court presided over the case for nearly 10 years, was very well acquainted with the parties, and had sufficient information to make an informed determination regarding the child's best interests (see Matter of Reynaldo M. v. Violet F., 88 A.D.3d 531, 531, 931 N.Y.S.2d 213 [1st Dept. 2011]). The child had lived with the same foster parent for most of her life, had bonded with the parent, and wished to be adopted.
We find no basis to disturb the court's credibility determinations (see Matter of Patrice H.W. [Marcia M.], 209 A.D.3d 554, 555, 176 N.Y.S.3d 48 [1st Dept. 2022]).
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.
Docket No: 1244
Decided: December 19, 2023
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)