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: JULIO D., A Dependent Child Under the Age of Eighteen Years, etc., Michelle D., etc., Respondent–Appellant, Commissioner of the Administration for Children's Services of the City of New York, Petitioner–Respondent.
Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Susan Larabee, J.), entered on or about April 4, 2000, which, upon a finding of permanent neglect, terminated the parental rights of appellant mother and committed custody and guardianship of the subject child to petitioner Commissioner of the Administration for Children's Services of the City of New York for purposes of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The finding of permanent neglect was supported by clear and convincing evidence. Although petitioner Administration for Children's Services from March 1994 until October 1996 diligently sought to help appellant reunite with her child by assisting her in obtaining housing and treatment for drug abuse, appellant frustrated those efforts by failing to satisfy the requirements of her drug rehabilitation program and failed to secure available housing. She thus failed during the statutorily relevant time period to plan for the return of her child, which is sufficient to support the finding of permanent neglect (see, Matter of Taqueena Louise C., 222 A.D.2d 283, 635 N.Y.S.2d 210, lv. denied 87 N.Y.2d 812, 644 N.Y.S.2d 145, 666 N.E.2d 1059).
Family Court's determination that it would be in the child's best interests to terminate appellant's parental rights so as to allow the adoption process to move forward was supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see, Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 N.Y.2d 136, 147–148, 481 N.Y.S.2d 26, 470 N.E.2d 824). The evidence adduced at the dispositional hearing disclosed that the child, who had been in foster care virtually since birth, was doing well in a stable foster home and that appellant had not demonstrated that she had overcome her drug dependency and had adequately planned for the child. No reason has been presented to disturb the credibility determinations made by Family Court based on its assessment of the testimony received at the dispositional hearing (see, Matter of Shevonne S., 188 A.D.2d 528, 591 N.Y.S.2d 195).
We have considered appellant's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.
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: January 15, 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)