Antonelli v. Department of Social Services
| Decision Date | 20 November 1989 |
| Citation | 155 A.D.2d 598,548 N.Y.S.2d 37 |
| Parties | In the Matter of Louis ANTONELLI, et al., Appellants, v. DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, et al., Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Marjorie Weinberg Rooney, Staten Island, for appellants.
Nicholas T. Montalto, Staten Island, for respondents.
Lenore Gittis, New York City (Marcia Egger, of counsel), Law Guardian for the child.
Before MOLLEN, P.J., and BROWN, RUBIN and SULLIVAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6 to obtain custody of a child, the foster parents appeal from a judgment of the Family Court, Queens County (DePhillips, J.), dated May 13, 1988, which dismissed the proceeding.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The foster parents contend that the plan of the Department of Social Services of the City of New York (hereinafter DSS) to extend the placement of the child, Jasmine, for 12 months and to transfer custody of the child to her maternal grandmother was arbitrary and capricious and not in the best interests of the child and was therefore violative of Family Court Act § 1055(c) and (d) because it did not contain a specific plan of action directing assistance to the natural mother in obtaining adequate housing, employment, counseling and psychiatric treatment or medical care for the infant, Jasmine. We disagree. Despite the foster parents' assertions to the contrary, the plan approved by the Family Court comports with the purposes of both the Social Services Law and the Family Court Act in satisfying the best interests of Jasmine.
Family Court Act § 1055 provides for an extension of placement upon a showing that the parent is presently unable to care for the child and that continued placement is in the child's best interest. Here, both conditions have been met. Furthermore, the legislative intent of Social Services Law § 384-b, as stated, is that "the state's first obligation is to help the family with services to prevent its break-up or to reunite it if the child has already left home" (Social Services Law § 384-b[1][a][iii]. The Commissioner's plan provided that Jasmine would reside with her maternal grandmother, Brunilda Gonzales, her aunt Judy Nunez, and her two older siblings, while her natural mother continued her efforts, through rehabilitation, to enable her to resume the care of her family. The record supports the finding of the DSS that Ms. Gonzales was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
S.B., Matter of
...its unmistakable mandate is that the extension of placement must be consistent with the best interests of the child; Antonelli v. DSS, 155 A.D.2d 598, 548 N.Y.S.2d 37 (Second Dept.1989); Matter of Belinda B., 114 A.D.2d 70, 497 N.Y.S.2d 961 (Fourth Dept.1986) and that it focus on the best i......
-
S. Children, Matter of
...Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. o/b/o Rodney D., 236 A.D.2d 393, 654 N.Y.S.2d 312; Matter of Antonelli v. Department of Social Servs., 155 A.D.2d 598, 548 N.Y.S.2d 37; Matter of Lindsay W., 129 A.D.2d 800, 514 N.Y.S.2d 792), Dorrett G., the foster parent of Dina S. since shortly aft......
-
Valentine v. Armor Elevator Co., Inc.
... ... Supreme Court, Appellate Division, ... Second Department ... Nov. 20, 1989 ... Mitchell R. Friedman, New York ... ...
-
Com'r of Admin. for Children's Services of City of New York, Matter of
...of foster care is in the children's best interests (see, Matter of Belinda B., 114 A.D.2d 70, 497 N.Y.S.2d 961; Matter of Antonelli, 155 A.D.2d 598, 548 N.Y.S.2d 37; Matter of Kenneth G., 39 A.D.2d 709, 331 N.Y.S.2d In this case, the petitioner failed to meet that burden. After a six-day he......