IN RE: Giselle H.G. (2019)

The Family Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the mother's motion to vacate, as she failed to present a reasonable excuse for her failure to appear at the fact-finding and dispositional hearings, and failed to provide a meritorious defense to the petition to terminate her parental rights (CPLR 5015[a][1];  Matter of Arianna–Samantha Lady Melissa S. [Carissa S.], 134 A.D.3d 582, 583, 23 N.Y.S.3d 31 [1st Dept. 2015], lv denied in part, dismissed in part 27 N.Y.3d 952, 29 N.Y.S.3d 914, 49 N.E.3d 1208 [2016]).  The mother failed to provide any details or documentation to support her claim that she was incarcerated on the date of the hearing (Matter of Amani Dominique H. [Andre H.], 67 A.D.3d 466, 889 N.Y.S.2d 552 [1st Dept. 2009];  Matter of Dumaka Hershey Jones D., 7 A.D.3d 261, 775 N.Y.S.2d 525 [1st Dept. 2004];  Matter of Devon Dupree F., 298 A.D.2d 103, 747 N.Y.S.2d 501 [1st Dept. 2002]).

Respondent's purported excuse of illness for failing to appear at another hearing was properly rejected since she failed to provide any documentation to substantiate her claim, and did not explain why she was unable to contact either the court or her attorney regarding her inability to attend the hearings of which she had notice, especially since the hearing with respect to the eldest child was held in the afternoon (Matter of Evan Matthew A. [Jocelyn Yvette A.], 91 A.D.3d 538, 938 N.Y.S.2d 6 [1st Dept. 2012].  In light of the mother's chronic failure to appear in court, the Family Court properly proceeded with the permanent neglect proceeding in her absence (Matter of Brittany Annette M. [Danielle McC.], 88 A.D.3d 466, 930 N.Y.S.2d 445 [1st Dept. 2011], lv dismissed 18 N.Y.3d 873, 938 N.Y.S.2d 853, 962 N.E.2d 278 [2012];  Matter of Kristen Simone V., 30 A.D.3d 174, 175, 815 N.Y.S.2d 561 [1st Dept. 2006]).  Clear and convincing evidence supports the court's finding that despite the agency's diligent efforts, the mother permanently neglected her children.

We have considered the mother's remaining contentions, including that the court was biased against her in favor of the agency, and find them unavailing.