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: BRADLEY J., a Person in Need of Supervision. Franklin County Department of Social Services, Respondent; Bradley J., Appellant.
Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Franklin County (Cortese, J.), entered October 22, 2004, which, inter alia, granted petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Ct. Act article 7, to extend respondent's placement.
Respondent was adjudicated a person in need of supervision pursuant to Family Ct. Act article 7 and placed in petitioner's custody for a period of 12 months commencing in September 2001. The placement was twice extended for 12-month periods. Shortly before the expiration of the second extension, petitioner commenced this proceeding seeking an additional 12-month extension and approval of a permanency plan. Following a hearing, Family Court granted the petition, subject to a six-month review of respondent's progress. At that time, respondent appealed. Subsequently, on August 5, 2005, an order on consent was entered, which approved the parties' agreement to extend respondent's placement with petitioner until June 2006.
Initially, we note that respondent does not challenge his adjudication as a person in need of supervision but, rather, appeals from Family Court's October 2004 order extending his placement with petitioner. As such, the August 2005 order on consent, which supercedes the order at issue, renders the instant appeal moot (see Matter of Carella v. Ferrara, 9 A.D.3d 605, 605, 780 N.Y.S.2d 90 [2004]; Matter of Nikita ZZ. [Victoria ZZ.], 307 A.D.2d 415, 416, 761 N.Y.S.2d 550 [2003]; Matter of Catherine MM. v. Ulster County Dept. of Social Servs., 293 A.D.2d 778, 779, 740 N.Y.S.2d 491 [2002] ). While respondent does not address the issue, our review of the record does not reveal any exception to the mootness doctrine.
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.
CARDONA, P.J.
MERCURE, CREW III, CARPINELLO and ROSE, JJ., concur.
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 10, 2005
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third 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)