Admin. for Children's Servs. v. Jesse W. (In re Jesse W.), 2019–08628
Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
Citation | 189 A.D.3d 848,136 N.Y.S.3d 117 |
Docket Number | Docket Nos. N-22880-17, N-22881-17,2019–08628,2019-08629 |
Parties | In THE MATTER OF JESSE W. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, respondent; v. Jesse W. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Aja W. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, respondent; v. Jesse W. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 2) |
Decision Date | 02 December 2020 |
189 A.D.3d 848
136 N.Y.S.3d 117
In THE MATTER OF JESSE W. (Anonymous).
Administration for Children's Services, respondent;
v.
Jesse W. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 1)
In the Matter of Aja W. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, respondent;
v.
Jesse W. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 2)
2019–08628
2019-08629
Docket Nos. N-22880-17, N-22881-17
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Submitted—October 27, 2020
December 2, 2020
Cheryl Charles–Duval, Brooklyn, NY, for appellant.
James E. Johnson, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Scott Shorr and Eric Lee of counsel), for respondent.
Seth Arthur Myles, Brooklyn, NY, attorney for the children.
RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P., JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, BETSY BARROS, PAUL WOOTEN, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
In related proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the father appeals from (1) a decision of the Family Court, Richmond County (Alison M. Hamanjian, J.), dated January 16, 2019, and (2) an order of disposition of the Family Court, Kings County (Erik S. Pitchal, J.), dated May 31, 2019. The order of disposition, upon an order of fact-finding dated January 30, 2019, finding that the father neglected the subject children, released the children to the mother's care and placed the father under the supervision of the Administration for Children's Services for a period of 12 months.
ORDERED that the appeal from the decision is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as no appeal lies from a decision (see Matter of Ariana M. [Edward M.] , 179 A.D.3d 923, 118 N.Y.S.3d 215 ); and it is further,
ORDERED that the appeal from so much of the order of disposition as released the children to the mother's care and placed the father under the supervision of the Administration for Children's Services for a period of 12 months is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,
ORDERED that the order of disposition is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs or disbursements.
By petitions dated August 18, 2017, the Administration for Children's Services (hereinafter ACS) alleged that the father had neglected the subject children. Following a fact-finding hearing, in a written decision, the Family...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Suffolk Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Michelle C. (In re Mia S.), 2020-01373
...is not required to establish that the child suffered actual harm or was at imminent risk of harm" ( Matter of Jesse W. [Jesse W.], 189 A.D.3d 848, 849–850, 136 N.Y.S.3d 117 [internal quotation marks omitted]).The 2021 amendment was part of the Marihuana Regulation and Taxation Act (hereinaf......
-
In re Mia S., 2020-01373
...is not required to establish that the child suffered actual harm or was at imminent risk of harm" (Matter of Jesse W. [Jesse W.], 189 A.D.3d 848, 849-850 [internal quotation marks omitted]). The 2021 amendment was part of the Marihuana Regulation and Taxation Act (hereinafter the MRTA), whi......