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: Daniel A.G. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, et al., petitioners-respondents; Jose Ricardo G. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Maritza C.G. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, et al., petitioners-respondents; Jose Ricardo G. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent. (Proceeding No. 2) In the Matter of Caitlin S.G. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, et al., petitioners-respondents; Jose Ricardo G. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent. (Proceeding No. 3) In the Matter of “Baby Girl” G. (Anonymous), also known as Star Petrona G. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, et al., petitioners-respondents; Jose Ricardo G. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent. (Proceeding No. 4) In the Matter of Thalia M.G. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, et al., petitioners-respondents; Jose Ricardo G. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent. (Proceeding No. 5)
Submitted-October 19, 2010
DECISION & ORDER
Steven Banks, New York, N.Y. (Tamara A. Steckler and Selene D'Alessio of counsel), attorney for the children.
In related proceedings to terminate parental rights pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b, the father appeals from so much of five orders of fact-finding and disposition (one as to each child) of the Family Court, Kings County (Grosvenor, J.), four dated July 16, 2009, and one dated September 16, 2009, as, after fact-finding and dispositional hearings, found that he had permanently neglected the children, terminated his parental rights, and transferred custody and guardianship of the children to St. Vincent's Services, Inc., and the Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York for the purpose of adoption.
ORDERED that the orders of fact-finding and disposition are affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
Contrary to the father's contention, the Family Court properly found that St. Vincent's Services, Inc. (hereinafter the agency), exercised diligent efforts to strengthen his relationship with his children by, inter alia, scheduling weekly visits with the children and referring him to parenting and anger management classes (see Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 N.Y.2d 136, 142; Matter of Shamel H., 61 AD3d 685, 686; Matter of Tynell S., 43 AD3d 1171, 1172; Matter of Joquan Jomaine-Anthony V., 39 AD3d 868, 869; Matter of Amy B., 37 AD3d 600, 600-601; Matter of Jennifer R., 29 AD3d 1005). Notwithstanding the agency's efforts, the father failed to plan for his children's future (see Social Services Law 384-b[7][c] ). In addition, although the father attended the required classes, he never gained any insight into why he needed to attend the classes. Accordingly, the Family Court correctly found that the children were permanently neglected (see Matter of Nathaniel T., 67 N.Y.2d 838, 842; Matter of Tynell S., 43 AD3d at 1173; Matter of Joquan Jomaine-Anthony V., 39 AD3d at 869; Matter of Jennifer R., 29 AD3d at 1006-1007).
Additionally, the Family Court properly determined that the best interests of the children would be served by terminating the father's rights and freeing the children for adoption by their foster parent, with whom they had been living for many years (see Matter of Tynell S., 43 AD3d at 1173; Matter of Joquan Jomaine-Anthony V., 39 AD3d at 869).
The parties' remaining contentions either are without merit or need not be reached in light of our determination.
DILLON, J.P., ANGIOLILLO, HALL and ROMAN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Matthew G. Kiernan
Clerk of 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.
Docket No: 2009-11380 2009-11381 2009-11382 2009-11383 2009-11384 (Docket Nos. B-5535-07, B-5536-07, B-5537-07, B-5538-07, B-5539-07)
Decided: November 09, 2010
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)