Karas, Matter of
| Decision Date | 04 November 1977 |
| Citation | 399 N.Y.S.2d 758,59 A.D.2d 1022 |
| Parties | In the Matter of Victor KARAS, Ethel Karas, Edwin Karas and Helen Karas, children under eighteen years alleged to be neglected by Helen Karas, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Nathaniel A. Barrell, Joseph A. Shifflett, Buffalo, for appellant.
Thaddeus Szymanski, County Atty., John J. Barone, Buffalo, for Erie County Dept. of Social Services.
Before MOULE, J. P., and CARDAMONE, SIMONS, DILLON and HANCOCK, JJ.
This is a proceeding brought by the Erie County Department of Social Services to terminate permanently respondent widow's parental right to the custody of her four children. The Family Court sustained the permanent neglect petition and ordered that the respondent's custodial right be terminated permanently and awarded the custody of her children to petitioner.
Respondent contends on appeal that the proof fails to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that she was financially and physically able either to maintain contact with or to plan for the future of her children. The assertion of financial inability clearly lacks merit. Although respondent was a recipient of public assistance, she could have made arrangements to visit and communicate with her children (see Matter of Orzo, 84 Misc.2d 482, 484 n. 4, 374 N.Y.S.2d 554, 558; see also Matter of Clear, 65 Misc.2d 323, 327, 318 N.Y.S.2d 876, 880). Similarly, there is no physical incapacity suggested in this record which would have interfered with some exercise of parental concern and responsibility. Despite the consideration accorded respondent's limited mental faculties, the finding of Family Court that she was physically able is adequately supported.
It is also claimed that the efforts of petitioner to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship failed to constitute "diligent efforts" as required by statute (Family Ct. Act, § 614, subd. 1, par. (c)). There are, of course, no defined actions which an agency must take in every case to satisfy the statutory mandate. The efforts should, however, be adapted to the particular circumstances and designed to effectuate the parental relationship (see Matter of Klug, 32 A.D.2d 915, 302 N.Y.S.2d 418; see also Gordon, Terminal Placements of Children and Permanent Termination of Parental Rights: The New York Permanent Neglect Statute, 46 St. John's L.Rev. 215, 239).
Here, petitioner's social worker testified that he was assigned to the case i...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Marilyn H., Matter of
...The availability of public funds constitutes financial capability from the standpoint of "permanent neglect" (see Matter of Karas, 59 A.D.2d 1022, 399 N.Y.S.2d 758 (4th Dept., lv. to app. den. 43 N.Y.2d 646, 402 N.Y.S.2d 1028, 373 N.E.2d 997), because the purpose of the financial ability cl......
-
Ikem B., Matter of
...48 A.D.2d 161, 164 (368 N.Y.S.2d 374, 377), affd. 37 N.Y.2d 619 (376 N.Y.S.2d 431, 339 N.E.2d 135)." (Matter of Karas, 59 A.D.2d 1022, 1023, 399 N.Y.S.2d 758, 759-760). Accordingly the order of the Family Court, New York County entered January 11, 1979, which dismissed the petition brought ......
-
Lisa Ann U, Matter of
...of Joyce A.R., 52 A.D.2d 882, 383 N.Y.S.2d 58). Petitioner's efforts were adapted to the particular circumstances (Matter of Karas, 59 A.D.2d 1022, 399 N.Y.S.2d 758, mot. for lv. to app. den. 43 N.Y.2d 646, 402 N.Y.S.2d 1028, 373 N.E.2d 997) and adequate to fulfill its statutory duty (Famil......
-
Jamie M., Matter of
...some sense of parental responsibility, its failure to have done so does not invalidate the finding of Family Court (Matter of Karas, 59 A.D.2d 1022, 1023, 399 N.Y.S.2d 758, mot. for lv. to app. den. 43 N.Y.2d 646, 402 N.Y.S.2d 1028, 373 N.E.2d 997). The record also reveals that there has be......