In re Danaryee B.

• Decision Date: 09 June 2017
• Citation: 56 N.Y.S.3d 755,151 A.D.3d 1765
• Parties: In the Matter of DANARYEE B. Erie County Department of Social Services, Petitioner–Respondent; Erica T., Respondent–Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

151 A.D.3d 1765

56 N.Y.S.3d 755

In the Matter of DANARYEE B. Erie County Department of Social Services, Petitioner–Respondent; Erica T., Respondent–Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

June 9, 2017.

Evelyne A. O'Sullivan, East Amherst, for Respondent–Appellant.

Lauren Creighton, Buffalo, for Petitioner–Respondent.

David C. Schopp, Attorney for the Child, The Legal Aid Bureau Fo Buffalo, Inc., Buffalo (Charles D. Halvorsen of Counsel).

PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., LINDLEY, DeJOSEPH, NEMOYER, AND TROUTMAN, JJ.

MEMORANDUM:

Respondent mother appeals from an order that, inter alia, terminated her parental rights with respect to the subject child pursuant to Social Services Law § 384–b on the ground of permanent neglect. At the outset, we note that the mother expressly waived her right to a dispositional hearing, and thus Family Court properly entered a disposition without holding such a hearing (see Matter Andrew Z., 41 A.D.3d 912, 913, 837 N.Y.S.2d 422 ; see generally Family Ct. Act § 625[a] ). Contrary to the mother's contention, the court did not abuse its discretion in declining to enter a suspended judgment. A suspended judgment "is a brief grace period designed to prepare the parent to be reunited with the child" (Matter of Michael B., 80 N.Y.2d 299, 311, 590 N.Y.S.2d 60, 604 N.E.2d 122 ; see § 633), and may be warranted where the parent has made sufficient progress in addressing the issues that led to the child's removal from custody (see Matter of James P. [Tiffany H.], 148 A.D.3d 1526, 1527, 49 N.Y.S.3d 209 ; Matter of Sapphire A.J. [Angelica J.], 122 A.D.3d 1296, 1297, 995 N.Y.S.2d 654, lv. denied 24 N.Y.3d 916, 2015 WL 687370 ). Here, the credible evidence at the hearing, including the testimony of petitioner's caseworker that the mother's apartment lacked a stove, and a bed or clothes for the child, established that the mother had not made sufficient progress in providing the child with suitable living conditions (see Matter of Andie M. [Kimberly M.], 101 A.D.3d 1638, 1638–1639, 956 N.Y.S.2d 368, lv. denied 20 N.Y.3d 1053, 961 N.Y.S.2d 828, 985 N.E.2d 424 ). Moreover, the court's findings concerning lack of meaningful visitation, lack of transportation, financial concerns, and unsuitable living conditions demonstrate that the court was properly concerned with the child's best interests, and thus the court properly determined that a suspended judgment was unwarranted (see Matter of Danielle N., 31 A.D.3d 1205, 1205, ...