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: PIERRE (Anonymous). Marlene S. (Anonymous), et al., appellants.
In a proceeding pursuant to Domestic Relations Law §§ 115 and 115-d to certify the petitioners as qualified adoptive parents, the petitioners appeal from an order of the Family Court, Rockland County (Garvey, J.), dated December 22, 2003, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding, without a hearing.
ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the petition is reinstated, and the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Rockland County, for further proceedings consistent herewith.
The subject child was born in Haiti on October 23, 1992, and apparently was adopted by the petitioners in that jurisdiction in 1998. The petitioners originally instituted a petition pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 115-a to adopt the child as an eligible foreign orphan, but, at the behest of the organization then known as the Immigration and Naturalization Service, filed the current petition pursuant to Domestic Relations Law §§ 115 and 115-d. Based solely upon an “indicated” report of child abuse which was filed with the Statewide Central Register of Child Abuse and Maltreatment, and a neglect proceeding which was settled without a finding of abuse or neglect, the Family Court denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding, without a hearing.
In an adoption proceeding, the main concern of the court is the best interests of the child (see Matter of George L. v. Commissioner of Fulton County Dept. of Social Servs., 194 A.D.2d 955, 956, 599 N.Y.S.2d 319; see generally Matter of Jacob, 86 N.Y.2d 651, 658, 636 N.Y.S.2d 716, 660 N.E.2d 397). The petitioners proffered significant evidence to support their contentions that they are able to support and nurture the child, and that the allegations in the report of child abuse were, at most, a one-time aberration. Therefore, the Family Court abused its discretion in denying the petition without a hearing to determine the child's best interests (see Matter of Alicia TT., 294 A.D.2d 642, 643-644, 742 N.Y.S.2d 155).
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.
Decided: November 15, 2004
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)