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: JONATHAN D. VANSKIVER, PETITIONER–RESPONDENT, v. MALLORY J. CLANCY, RESPONDENT–APPELLANT.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
SAMANTHA PETERS SMITH, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD, CANISTEO.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: On appeal from an order modifying a prior custody order by, inter alia, awarding sole legal custody and primary physical placement of the parties' child to petitioner father, respondent mother contends that she was denied effective assistance of counsel. “[W]e note at the outset that, ‘because the potential consequences are so drastic, the Family Court Act affords protections equivalent to the constitutional standard of effective assistance of counsel afforded defendants in criminal proceedings' “ (Matter of Brown v. Gandy, 125 AD3d 1389, 1390). We nevertheless reject the mother's contention inasmuch as she did not “ ‘demonstrate the absence of strategy or other legitimate explanations' for counsel's alleged shortcomings” (People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 712; see Matter of Reinhardt v. Hardison, 122 AD3d 1448, 1449).
Contrary to the mother's further contention, Family Court did not abuse its discretion in denying her attorney's request for an adjournment and in holding the hearing in her absence (see Matter of O'Leary v. Frangomihalos, 89 AD3d 948, 949; see generally Matter of Steven B., 6 NY3d 888, 889). The mother was aware of the hearing date, and her attorney's “vague claim that [she] was unable to attend the hearing due to [winter weather conditions] was unsupported by any detailed explanation or evidence from the [mother]” (Matter of Braswell v. Braswell, 80 AD3d 827, 829; see O'Leary, 89 AD3d at 949).
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 14–00328
Decided: May 01, 2015
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.
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)