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: KARMA–MARIE W. (Anonymous). Tamara W. (Anonymous), appellant; v. Jerry W. (Anonymous), et al., respondents.
DECISION & ORDER
In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Sharon N. Clarke, J.), dated March 28, 2024. The order, sua sponte, dismissed the petition for guardianship of the subject child with prejudice.
ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the petition for guardianship of the subject child is reinstated, and the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Kings County, for a hearing and a determination of the petition thereafter.
On September 1, 2023, the petitioner filed a petition pursuant to Family Court Act article 6 to be appointed the guardian of the subject child. The petitioner is not related to the child. In an order dated March 28, 2024, the Family Court, without a hearing, sua sponte, determined that the petitioner lacked standing to bring the petition and dismissed the petition with prejudice. The petitioner appeals.
The Family Court should not have dismissed the petition on the ground that the petitioner was not a relative of the child (see Matter of Dalida P., 204 A.D.2d 645, 645, 612 N.Y.S.2d 223). Although the petitioner is not biologically related to the child, SCPA 1703, which is applicable to this proceeding (see Family Ct Act § 661), provides that a petition for the appointment of a guardian may be brought by “any person” (SCPA 1703; see Matter of Dalida P., 204 A.D.2d at 645, 612 N.Y.S.2d 223). Nor was there any basis in the record to dismiss the petition with prejudice (see Matter of Linares–Mendez v. Cazanga–Payes, 183 A.D.3d 738, 739, 121 N.Y.S.3d 659).
Accordingly, since the Family Court dismissed the petition for guardianship of the child with prejudice without conducting a hearing or considering the child's best interests, the matter must be remitted to the Family Court, Kings County, for a hearing and determination of the petition thereafter (see Matter of Francisca M.V.R. v. Jose G.H.G., 154 A.D.3d 856, 857, 62 N.Y.S.3d 169; Matter of Jorge A.V.G. [Marta G.], 119 A.D.3d 566, 567, 987 N.Y.S.2d 909).
DUFFY, J.P., WOOTEN, LANDICINO and MCCORMACK, JJ., concur.
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: 2024-03478
Decided: January 08, 2025
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)