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: SAVANNAH V., A Child Under the age of Eighteen Years, etc., Marie M., Respondent-Appellant, Catholic Home Bureau for Dependent Children, Petitioner-Respondent.
Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Douglas E. Hoffman, J.), entered on or about May 25, 2004, which, following a fact-finding determination that respondent mother had permanently neglected the child, terminated her parental rights and committed custody and guardianship of the child to petitioner agency and the Commissioner of Social Services for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The finding of permanent neglect is supported by clear and convincing evidence (Matter of Lionel Burton W., 30 A.D.3d 355, 818 N.Y.S.2d 72 [2006] ). The agency's efforts included scheduling regular visitation between mother and child, and referring and encouraging the mother to attend and complete a drug treatment program. The record clearly and convincingly shows that despite those efforts, respondent missed approximately half of her scheduled visits, failed to complete a drug treatment program, and otherwise failed to plan for the child's future.
The court's findings regarding the best interests of the child were supported by a preponderance of the evidence, highlighting the positive environment provided by the foster mother and her desire to adopt the child, which was in furtherance of the goal of finding a permanent home for this child (see Matter of Taaliyah Simone S.D., 28 A.D.3d 371, 813 N.Y.S.2d 87 [2006] ). A suspended judgment would not have been warranted since respondent did not complete a drug program and there was no evidence as to how she planned to provide this child with an adequate and stable home (Matter of Rutherford Roderick T., 4 A.D.3d 213, 772 N.Y.S.2d 49 [2004] ).
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: March 20, 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)