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.
Matter of JASMIN E.R. Matter of Kimberly A.P. and Daniel P., Sr., Petitioners-Respondents, v. Maria S., Respondent-Respondent,
Chad C., Respondent-Appellant. (Proceeding No. 1.) Matter of Bonnie C., Petitioner-Respondent, v. Maria S., Respondent-Respondent. (Proceeding No. 2.)
Matter of Chad C., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Maria S., Respondent-Respondent. (Proceeding No. 3.)
Matter of Bonnie C., Petitioner-Respondent, v. Chad C., Respondent-Appellant, Maria S., Respondent-Respondent. (Proceeding No. 4.)
Respondent-petitioner father appeals from an order determining, inter alia, that he is not a party whose consent is needed for the adoption of his child and denying his petition for post-adoption visitation. Initially, we note that, because respondent mother has not taken an appeal from the order, any issue concerning her consent to the adoption is not properly before us. Family Court properly dispensed with the consent of the father to the adoption of his child pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 111(2)(a). “Neither the order of protection prohibiting [the father] from contacting the child[ ] nor his incarceration prevented him from contacting the persons having legal custody of the child[ ] or * * * the agency maintaining supervision of [the father] and the child[ ]” (Matter of Krysheena, 265 A.D.2d 816, 816, 695 N.Y.S.2d 469; see also § 111[2][a]; Matter of Naticia Q., 226 A.D.2d 755, 640 N.Y.S.2d 334; Matter of Charmaine T., 173 A.D.2d 625, 627, 570 N.Y.S.2d 209). The failure of the father to maintain contact with the person having legal custody of his child is a clear manifestation of an intent to forego parental obligations to her (see Krysheena, 265 A.D.2d at 816-817, 695 N.Y.S.2d 469). Although the father testified that the mother prevented him from contacting the child, the court found that testimony to be incredible and we see no reason to disturb that finding (see Matter of Gabriela, 283 A.D.2d 983, 984, 723 N.Y.S.2d 797, lv. denied 96 N.Y.2d 721, 733 N.Y.S.2d 373, 759 N.E.2d 372). In addition, the court's determination that the best interests of the child will not be served by granting the father post-adoption visitation with the child is supported by the record. The father was convicted of one count of second degree course of sexual conduct against a child (Penal Law § 130.80 [former (a)] ) and three counts of endangering the welfare of a child (§ 260.10[1] ), shows no remorse with respect to that conviction and refuses to attend sexual abuse counseling (see Matter of Gutkaiss v. Leahy, 285 A.D.2d 752, 753, 726 N.Y.S.2d 826; Matter of Chaya S. v. Frederick Herbert L., 284 A.D.2d 335, 725 N.Y.S.2d 576; Matter of Ellett v. Ellett, 265 A.D.2d 747, 698 N.Y.S.2d 740).
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.
MEMORANDUM:
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: March 21, 2003
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth 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)