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: Barbara PARLIAMENT, respondent, v. Garland HARRIS, appellant.
In a custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Rockland County (Garvey, J.), entered June 22, 1998, which granted permanent custody of his son, Keith Harris, to the petitioner.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
We agree with the Family Court that the requisite “extraordinary circumstances” exist to justify depriving the appellant of custody of his son, Keith Harris (see, Matter of Bennett v. Jeffreys, 40 N.Y.2d 543, 544, 387 N.Y.S.2d 821, 356 N.E.2d 277), and that Keith's best interests lie in granting custody to the petitioner, who is not Keith's biological mother (see, Matter of Bennett v. Jeffreys, supra; Eschbach v. Eschbach, 56 N.Y.2d 167, 451 N.Y.S.2d 658, 436 N.E.2d 1260).
The appellant is currently incarcerated upon his conviction of charges arising from his sexual abuse of the petitioner's daughter. Based upon that conviction, the Family Court made findings of sexual abuse and derivative neglect against the appellant (see, Matter of Carosi v. Bloom, 225 A.D.2d 692, 639 N.Y.S.2d 486). Moreover, the appellant's son, Keith Harris, who is now 15 years old, has resided with the petitioner, who is the appellant's paramour, since 1990. Keith's younger brother and the petitioner's other children also reside with the petitioner. Moreover, Keith has developed a close and loving relationship with the petitioner, and expressed his desire to remain in her home. Neither the child's biological mother nor any other party petitioned for custody.
Contrary to the appellant's further contention, the record demonstrates that he received meaningful representation in this proceeding (see, Family Ct. Act § 262[a][v] ).
The appellant's remaining contentions are without merit.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
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 01, 1999
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)