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: BEAUTY B. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Child Protective Services, respondent; Ronald B. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 1). In the Matter of Kelron B. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Child Protective Services, respondent; Ronald B. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 2). In the Matter of Leron B. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Child Protective Services, respondent; Ronald B. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 3). In the Matter of Tre'ron B. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Child Protective Services, respondent; Ronald B. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 4).
In four related proceedings pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b to terminate parental rights on the ground of abandonment, the father appeals from an order of fact-finding and disposition of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Sweeney, J.), dated September 28, 2007, which, after a fact-finding hearing, and upon a decision of the same court dated September 10, 2007, found that the father abandoned the subject children, terminated his parental rights on the ground of abandonment, and transferred custody and guardianship of the children to the Suffolk County Department of Social Services for the purposes of adoption.
ORDERED that on the Court's own motion, the notice of appeal from the decision is deemed a premature notice of appeal from the order of fact-finding and disposition (see CPLR 5520[c] ); and it is further,
ORDERED that the order of fact-finding and disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The Family Court properly found, upon clear and convincing evidence, that the father abandoned the subject children for the six-month period immediately prior to the filing of the petitions (see Social Services Law § 384-b[4] [b]; Matter of Female F., 40 A.D.3d 993, 993-994, 837 N.Y.S.2d 192). While the father, who was incarcerated during that period, testified that he was discouraged or prevented from communicating with the children, the Family Court did not credit that testimony, and we find no reason to disturb that determination (see Matter of Orange County Dept. of Social Servs. [Diane A.], 203 A.D.2d 367, 610 N.Y.S.2d 553; cf. Matter of Annette B., 4 N.Y.3d 509, 514, 796 N.Y.S.2d 569, 829 N.E.2d 661).
The father's remaining contention is without merit.
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: August 05, 2008
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)