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: CHRISTINE MONIQUE M., A Dependent Child Under the Age of Eighteen Years, etc., James M., Respondent-Appellant, Little Flower Children's Services, Petitioner-Respondent.
Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Jody Adams, J.), entered on or about March 26, 2001, which, to the extent appealed from, upon a fact-finding determination that respondent father suffers from mental illness as defined in Social Services Law § 384-b(6)(a), terminated his parental rights to the subject child pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b(4)(c) and transferred custody and guardianship of the child to petitioner agency and the Commissioner of the Social Services of the City of New York for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Clear and convincing evidence, including the testimony of a court-appointed psychiatrist, as well as mental health treatment records documenting respondent father's extensive history of mental illness, supports Family Court's determination that respondent father is presently, and for the foreseeable future unable, by reason of mental illness, to provide proper and adequate care for the subject child (see, Social Services Law § 384-b[4][c] ). Since respondent is incapable of adequately caring for the child at present and there is no evidence warranting the conclusion that he will be capable of doing so in the foreseeable future, Family Court properly granted the petition seeking termination of respondent's parental rights (see, Matter of Moses Z., 282 A.D.2d 341, 723 N.Y.S.2d 643, lv. denied 96 N.Y.2d 717, 730 N.Y.S.2d 791, 756 N.E.2d 79; Matter of Chuckie Douglas M., 188 A.D.2d 280, 590 N.Y.S.2d 446; Matter of Vera T., 80 A.D.2d 511, 435 N.Y.S.2d 598, affd. 55 N.Y.2d 1028, 449 N.Y.S.2d 708, 434 N.E.2d 1075).
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: June 18, 2002
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)