In re Beatrice A.

Decision Date21 February 2018
Docket NumberDocket No. B–8247–14,2017–01770
Citation68 N.Y.S.3d 751 (Mem),158 A.D.3d 747
Parties In the MATTER OF BEATRICE A. (Anonymous), also known as Beatrice J. (Anonymous), also known as Beatrice S. (Anonymous). SCO Family of Services, respondent; Selina A. (Anonymous), appellant.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Mark Diamond, New York, NY, for appellant.

Leventhal, Mullaney & Blinkoff, LLP, Roslyn, N.Y. (Jeffrey Blinkoff of counsel), for respondent.

Seymour W. James, Jr., New York, N.Y. (Dawne Mitchell and Susan Clement of counsel), attorney for the child.

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P. JOHN M. LEVENTHAL SANDRA L. SGROI JOSEPH J. MALTESE, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the mother from an order of fact-finding and disposition of the Family Court, Queens County (Marybeth S. Richroath, J.), dated January 12, 2017. The order, insofar as appealed from, after a hearing, found that the mother abandoned the subject child, terminated her parental rights, and transferred guardianship and custody of the child to SCO Family of Services and the Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York for the purpose of adoption.

ORDERED that the order of fact-finding and disposition is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The petitioner, SCO Family of Services, commenced this proceeding to terminate the mother's parental rights to the subject child. After a hearing, the Family Court found that the mother abandoned the child, terminated her parental rights, and transferred guardianship and custody of the child to the petitioner and the Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York for the purpose of adoption.

An order terminating parental rights may be granted where the petitioner has established, by clear and convincing evidence, that the parent abandoned the child for the six-month period before the petition was filed (see Social Services Law § 384–b[3][g][i] ; [4][b]; Matter of Annette B., 4 N.Y.3d 509, 513, 796 N.Y.S.2d 569, 829 N.E.2d 661 ; Matter of Tamar T.W. [Temorerie T.W.], 149 A.D.3d 852, 852, 51 N.Y.S.3d 610 ). An intent to abandon a child is manifested by the parent's "failure to visit the child or communicate with the child or the agency although able to do so and not prevented or discouraged from doing so by the agency" ( Matter of Julius P., 63 N.Y.2d 477, 481, 483 N.Y.S.2d 175, 472 N.E.2d 1003 ; see Matter of Jeremiah Kwimea T., 10 A.D.3d 691, 691, 781 N.Y.S.2d 784 ). The burden rests on the parent to maintain contact, and the agency need not show diligent efforts to encourage the parent to visit or communicate with the child (see Matter of Gabrielle HH., 1 N.Y.3d 549, 550, 772 N.Y.S.2d 643, 804 N.E.2d 964 ; Matter of Julius P., 63 N.Y.2d at 481, 483 N.Y.S.2d 175, 472 N.E.2d 1003 ; Matter of Tamar T.W. [Temorerie T.W.], 149 A.D.3d at 853, 51 N.Y.S.3d 610 ).

Here, the petitioner established, by clear and convincing evidence, that the mother abandoned the child during the six-month period before the filing of the petition (see ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Suffolk Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Darrell D.H. (In re Darrell H.)
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • December 16, 2020
    ...A.D.3d 624, 625, 87 N.Y.S.3d 213 ; Matter of Aliyah S.P. [William L.], 163 A.D.3d at 969, 79 N.Y.S.3d 676 ; Matter of Beatrice A. [Selina A.], 158 A.D.3d 747, 748, 68 N.Y.S.3d 751 ; Matter of Tinisha J. [William J.], 135 A.D.3d at 761, 762, 23 N.Y.S.3d 313 ; Matter of Samantha L.S. [Daniel ......
  • Saint Dominic's Home v. Ralph R. (In re Mikai R.)
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • November 7, 2018
    ...responsibility to maintain contact with the children or communicate with the children or the petitioner (see Matter of Beatrice A. [Selina A.], 158 A.D.3d 747, 748, 68 N.Y.S.3d 751 ). LEVENTHAL, J.P., CHAMBERS, SGROI and CONNOLLY, JJ., ...
  • People v. Vargas, 2016–04503
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • February 21, 2018
  • Dutchess Cnty. Dep't of Cmty. & Family Servs. v. William L. (In re Aliyah S.P.)
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • July 25, 2018
    ...relieve him of his responsibility to maintain contact or communicate with the child or the petitioner (see Matter of Beatrice A. [Selina A.], 158 A.D.3d 747, 748, 68 N.Y.S.3d 751 ). Although the father testified to attempts to maintain contact through his mother and other family members, hi......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT