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: DOMINIQUE S. and Others, Children Alleged to be Permanently Neglected. Willie M., Respondent-Appellant, The Catholic Child Care Society, etc., et al., Petitioners-Respondents.
Orders of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Mary Bednar, J.), entered on or about March 15, 1996, terminating respondent's parental rights to the subject children and committing their guardianship and custody to petitioner agency and the Commissioner of Social Services for the purposes of adoption, upon a fact-finding determination of permanent neglect, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The finding of permanent neglect is supported by clear and convincing evidence that respondent, while incarcerated, failed to maintain substantial contact with the children for more than a year (Social Services Law § 384-b[7][a]; see, Matter of Gregory B., 74 N.Y.2d 77, 88-90, 544 N.Y.S.2d 535, 542 N.E.2d 1052; Matter of Thomas G., 165 A.D.2d 729, 564 N.Y.S.2d 32). It does not avail respondent to argue that the agency failed to arrange visitation or make other diligent efforts to encourage his parental relationship with the children while he was incarcerated, respondent having failed for a period of more than six months after he was incarcerated to inform the agency of his whereabouts (Social Services Law § 384-b[7][e][i]; see, Matter of Crystal K., 204 A.D.2d 105, 611 N.Y.S.2d 528). Moreover, clear and convincing evidence shows that even before his incarceration, and despite the agency's diligent efforts to assist him, respondent failed to take the steps necessary to plan for the children's future. The only plan he ever offered was to propose at various times that the children live with his mother, his sisters or his girlfriend, all of whom were either unable, unwilling or ill-suited to provide an adequate, stable home (see, Matter of Charles Frederick Eugene M., 171 A.D.2d 343, 347, 577 N.Y.S.2d 253, appeal dismissed 79 N.Y.2d 977, 583 N.Y.S.2d 194, 592 N.E.2d 802). It is in the children's best interests that they be freed for adoption by the related foster families with whom they have lived since infancy, and thrived (see, Matter of Joseph Jerome H., 224 A.D.2d 224, 637 N.Y.S.2d 401).
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
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 19, 2000
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)