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: JAMAR TERRY N. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, et al., respondents; Marie C. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Larmar Veraby N. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, et al., respondents; Marie C. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 2).
In two related proceedings pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b to terminate parental rights on the ground of abandonment, the mother appeals from two orders of fact-finding and disposition (one as to each child) of the Family Court, Queens County (Salinitro, J.), both dated January 4, 2007, which, after a fact-finding hearing, terminated her parental rights on the ground of abandonment, and transferred custody and guardianship of the subject children to Mercy First and the Commissioner of the Administration for Children's Services for the purposes of adoption.
ORDERED that the orders of fact-finding and disposition are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The evidence adduced at the fact-finding hearing established, by clear and convincing evidence, that the mother had abandoned the children for the six-month period immediately prior to the filing of the petitions (see Social Services Law § 384-b [5][a]; Matter of Female F., 40 A.D.3d 993, 837 N.Y.S.2d 192; Matter of Saquan L.E., 19 A.D.3d 418, 796 N.Y.S.2d 408; Matter of I.R., 153 A.D.2d 559, 544 N.Y.S.2d 216). In opposition, the mother failed to satisfy her burden of proving that she suffered from a severe hardship that so permeated her life that attempts at communication were not feasible (see Matter of Elizabeth Susanna R., 11 A.D.3d 619, 783 N.Y.S.2d 641).
Contrary to the mother's contention, the Family Court acted within its discretion in terminating her parental rights without first conducting a dispositional hearing (see Matter of Miguel K., 1 A.D.3d 438, 766 N.Y.S.2d 899; Matter of Tashara B., 299 A.D.2d 356, 749 N.Y.S.2d 173).
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: December 04, 2007
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)