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: Milagros Angelina Henriquez Santiago, et al., appellants, v. Leeanders Henderson, respondent-respondent, et al., respondent.
Submitted—October 16, 2014
DECISION & ORDER
In a custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the petitioners appeal from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Whelan, J.), dated October 30, 2013, which, without a hearing, granted the father's motion to dismiss the petition for lack of standing.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
“As between a parent and a nonparent, the parent has the superior right to custody that cannot be denied unless the nonparent establishes that the parent has relinquished that right due to surrender, abandonment, persistent neglect, unfitness, or other like extraordinary circumstances” (Matter of Wilson v. Smith, 24 AD3d 562, 563; see Matter of Bennett v. Jeffreys, 40 N.Y.2d 543, 548; Matter of Barcellos v. Warren–Kidd, 57 AD3d 984, 985; Matter of Hyde v. King, 47 AD3d 813; Matter of Bermeo v. Rios, 33 AD3d 613; Matter of Dungee v. Simmons, 307 A.D.2d 312). The burden of proof is on the nonparent to prove such extraordinary circumstances (see Matter of Tristram K., 25 AD3d 222, 226). Absent proof of such extraordinary circumstances, an inquiry into the best interests of the child is not triggered (see Matter of Dungee v. Simmons, 307 A.D.2d at 312–313). Here, the Family Court properly determined that the nonparent petitioners, whose petition to adopt the subject child was correctly denied (see Matter of Baby Girl N. [Anonymous], _ AD3d _ [Appellate Division Docket No. 2013–09330; decided herewith] ), failed, in this custody proceeding, to allege the existence of extraordinary circumstances. Accordingly, the Family Court properly granted the father's motion to dismiss their custody petition for lack of standing (see Matter of Marquis B. v. Alexis H., 110 AD3d 790; see also Matter of Andracchi v. Reetz, 106 AD3d 734; Matter of Lampitt v. Lampitt, 103 AD3d 897; Matter of Brown v. Zuzierla, 73 AD3d 765).
DILLON, J.P., CHAMBERS, COHEN and MALTESE, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Aprilanne Agostino
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: 2013–11175 (Docket Nos. V–17194–13, V–17197–13)
Decided: November 19, 2014
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)