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: GABRIELLE G. (Anonymous) and Another, Dependent Children Under the Age of Eighteen Years, etc., Mike G. (Anonymous), Respondent–Appellant, v. Catholic Guardian Services, Petitioner–Respondent.
Orders of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Karen I. Lupuloff, J.), entered on or about July 10, 2017, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, determined that respondent's consent was not required for the adoption of the subject children, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Respondent admitted that he did not provide the children with financial support after they were placed into foster care(see Domestic Relations Law § 111[1][d]; Matter of Rickelme Alfredo B. [Ricardo Alfred B.], 132 A.D.3d 490, 19 N.Y.S.3d 20 [1st Dept. 2015] ). Petitioner was not required to inform respondent of his financial support obligation (Domestic Relations Law § 111[1][d]; see Matter of Tiara J. [Anthony Lamont A.], 118 A.D.3d 545, 988 N.Y.S.2d 56 [1st Dept. 2014] ).
Respondent failed to demonstrate that he received ineffective assistance of counsel (see Matter of Asia Sabrina N. [Olu N.], 117 A.D.3d 543, 544, 985 N.Y.S.2d 560 [1st Dept. 2014] ). He contends that his attorney did not make a sufficient effort to show that he lacked the financial ability to support the children. However, counsel's decision not to question respondent about his financial circumstances may have been strategic (see People v. Sargsyan, 71 A.D.3d 401, 894 N.Y.S.2d 867 [1st Dept. 2010] ). Moreover, respondent presented no evidence that his proposed line of questioning had a realistic chance of succeeding (see People v. Stultz, 2 N.Y.3d 277, 287, 778 N.Y.S.2d 431, 810 N.E.2d 883 [2004] ).
Respondent's argument that Domestic Relations Law § 111(1)(d) violates the equal protection clause by imposing on unwed fathers a duty it does not impose on married fathers is improperly raised for the first time on appeal. We have considered respondent's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.
The Decision and Order of this Court entered herein on November 8, 2018 (166 A.D.3d 416, 87 N.Y.S.3d 154 [1st Dept. 2018] ) is hereby recalled and vacated (see M–6431, 2019 WL 348738 decided simultaneously herewith).
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.
Docket No: 7551
Decided: January 29, 2019
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)