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.
PETITIONER–RESPONDENT; CORNELIUS N., SR., RESPONDENT–APPELLANT.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
STEVEN B. LEVITSKY, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILDREN, ROCHESTER.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Respondent father appeals from an order that terminated his parental rights with respect to the subject children. The father does not dispute that he violated the terms and conditions of the suspended judgment, but he contends that Family Court should have extended the suspended judgment for another year. However, the father “failed to demonstrate that ‘exceptional circumstances' required extension of the suspended judgment” (Matter of Demario J., 61 AD3d 1437, 1438, quoting Family Ct Act § 633[b]; see Matter of Lestariyah A. [Demetrious L.], 89 AD3d 1420, 1420–1421). Thus, the court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to extend the suspended judgment (see Lestariyah A., 89 AD3d at 1420–1421; Matter of Jonathan J., 47 AD3d 992, 993, lv denied 10 NY3d 706).
The father's contention that petitioner did not make significant efforts to reunite him with the children is not properly before us inasmuch as “it was conclusively determined in the prior proceedings to terminate [the father's] parental rights” (Matter of Ronald O., 43 AD3d 1351, 1351). We note in any event that the father admitted to the permanent neglect of the children and consented to the entry of the suspended judgment, “and thus no appeal would lie therefrom because [the father was] not aggrieved, based on [his] consent” (id. at 1352; see Matter of Moniea C., 9 AD3d 888, 888; Matter of Cherilyn P., 192 A.D.2d 1084, 1084, lv denied 82 N.Y.2d 652).
Frances E. Cafarell
Clerk of the Court
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.
Docket No: CAF 13–00315
Decided: May 02, 2014
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)