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: ELIZABETH AMANDA T., etc., and Another, Dependent Children Under Eighteen Years of Age, etc., Jose Luis T., Respondent-Appellant, Graham-Windham Services to Families and Children, Petitioner-Respondent.
Orders, Family Court, New York County (Sara P. Schechter, J.), entered on or about April 5, 2006, which, insofar as appealed from, following a fact-finding determination of abandonment, terminated respondent father's parental rights to the subject children and committed their custody and guardianship to petitioner agency and the Commissioner of Social Services for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The finding of abandonment is supported by clear and convincing evidence, including respondent's testimony that he last saw his children in 2001, before their 2002 placement in foster care and more than three years before the filing of the petition; the absence of evidence of any cards, letters, gifts, or financial support from respondent to the children during that period; and the agency's progress notes showing no contact with the agency for more than 20 months before the filing of the petition. Respondent's undocumented and disputed attempts to call the agency on two occasions during the statutory six-month period, which, he asserts, failed because of a language barrier, were “too minimal and half-hearted to preclude a finding of abandonment” (Matter of Female W., 271 A.D.2d 210, 706 N.Y.S.2d 98 [2000]; see also Matter of Unique Jaleel S., 35 A.D.3d 250, 825 N.Y.S.2d 219 [2006]; Matter of Erica C., 257 A.D.2d 445, 683 N.Y.S.2d 262 [1999] ). Nor is a finding of abandonment precluded by the fact that the agency did not contact respondent for the purpose of arranging visitation or encouraging him to take the paternity test that Family Court had apparently ordered as a condition to the agency's undertaking any planning with him (Social Services Law § 384-b[5][b] ). A preponderance of the evidence shows that the children are in a stable and caring pre-adoptive home, have bonded with their foster mother and the other children in the home, and have expressed no desire to see their father, and that termination of respondent's parental rights is in their best interests (see Unique Jaleel, 35 A.D.3d at 250, 825 N.Y.S.2d 219).
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: October 18, 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)