Matter of Isaiah R., 9825.
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
| Citation | 35 A.D.3d 249,825 N.Y.S.2d 218,2006 NY Slip Op 09373 |
| Docket Number | 9825. |
| Parties | In the Matter of ISAIAH R., a Child Alleged to be Permanently Neglected. TAMMY R., Appellant; GRAHAM-WINDHAM SERVICES TO FAMILIES AND CHILDREN, Respondent. |
| Decision Date | 14 December 2006 |
TAMMY R., Appellant;
GRAHAM-WINDHAM SERVICES TO FAMILIES AND CHILDREN, Respondent.
Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Sara P. Schecter, J.), entered on or about November 3, 2004, terminating respondent's parental rights to the subject child upon a finding of permanent neglect, and committing the child's guardianship and custody to petitioner agency and the Commissioner of Social Services for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Respondent failed to preserve her claim that the agency's progress notes are inadmissible hearsay, and we decline to review it (see Matter of "Baby Girl" Q., 14 AD3d 392 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 704 [2005]). In any event, the testimony of the agency's caseworker established that the highlighted portions of the progress notes were made in the ordinary course of business
and thus admissible as business records (see id.). The progress notes provide clear and convincing evidence of respondent's repeated refusal to cooperate with the agency's diligent efforts referring her for mental health counseling, and that she otherwise failed to plan for the child's future during the relevant time period (see id.). A preponderance of the evidence shows that a suspended judgment would not be in the child's best interests. We have considered respondent's other arguments and find them unavailing.
Concur — Buckley, P.J., Mazzarelli, Gonzalez, Sweeny and Catterson, JJ.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Allison Y. v. (In re Samantha M.)
...381, 381–382, 854 N.Y.S.2d 353 [1st Dept.2008], lv. denied11 N.Y.3d 709, 868 N.Y.S.2d 601, 897 N.E.2d 1085 [2008]; Matter of Isaiah R., 35 A.D.3d 249, 249, 825 N.Y.S.2d 218 [1st Dept.2006] ). In any event, on these facts, the records were properly admitted under the business record exceptio......
-
Enerfry H. v. Admin. for Children's Servs. for the City of N.Y. (In re Another), 14352-14352A
...ACS supervisor failed to testify whether the caseworker had the obligation to make those entries is unpreserved (see Matter of Isaiah R., 35 A.D.3d 249, 249, 825 N.Y.S.2d 218 [1st Dept. 2006] ). Were we to review the claim, we would find that the notes are admissible as business records. Th......
-
Alicia T. v. Mary McD. R. (In re Elizabeth E.R.T.), 8073
...S.], 150 A.D.3d 1698, 1700, 52 N.Y.S.3d 607 [4th Dept. 2017], lv denied 29 N.Y.3d 919, 2017 WL 4051983 [2017] ; Matter of Isaiah R., 35 A.D.3d 249, 825 N.Y.S.2d 218 [1st Dept. 2006] ). In any event, the progress notes were properly admitted under the business records exception to the hearsa......
-
In re Adonis H., 2021-05627
...ACS supervisor failed to testify whether the caseworker had the obligation to make those entries is unpreserved (see Matter of Isaiah R., 35 A.D.3d 249, 249 [1st Dept 2006]). Were we to review the claim, we would find that the notes are admissible as business records. The supervisor's testi......