IN RE: ZARAE E. (2026)

Appeals from order, Family Court, Bronx County (Angel Cruz, J.), entered on or about October 23, 2025, which granted in part and denied in part respondent mother's motion to compel discovery, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as moot.  Appeal from order, same court and Judge, entered on or about November 25, 2025, which granted the motion of Administration for Children's Services to stay enforcement of the October 23, 2025 discovery order, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as moot.

The appeals from the discovery order are moot and/or academic in view of the dismissal of the underlying neglect proceeding on consent (see Matter of Muhamad Omar W. [Jessica W.], 204 AD3d 453, 453–454 [1st Dept 2022] ).  The appeal from the stay order is necessarily moot as well as it arose from the underlying discovery order (see Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714 [1980] ).

Contrary to the mother's contention, the narrow exception to the mootness doctrine is inapplicable (see id. at 714–715;  Matter of Santiago v Berlin, 111 AD3d 487, 487 [1st Dept 2013] ).  Family Court's determination denying part of the relief requested by the mother with respect to production of certain documents was a fact-specific determination and thus unlikely to recur (see Matter of Darcy M. [Gethylee C.], 195 AD3d 719, 720 [2d Dept 2021] ).  Nor will the issues presented by the mother typically evade review, and, in any event, they do not reflect substantial and novel issues (see Matter of Hearst Corp., 50 NY2d at 714–715).