Steuben Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Sheila E.K. (In re Violette K.)
Decision Date | 08 June 2012 |
Citation | 946 N.Y.S.2d 519,96 A.D.3d 1499,2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 04601 |
Parties | In the Matter of VIOLETTE K. Steuben County Department of Social Services, Petitioner–Respondent; Sheila E.K., Respondent–Appellant. |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Steuben County (Joseph W. Latham, J.), entered July 27, 2011 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10. The order, among other things, placed the subject child in the custody of petitioner.
Cara A. Waldman, Fairport, for respondent–appellant.
Alan P. Reed, County Attorney, Bath (Craig A. Patrick of counsel), for petitioner–respondent.
Christine M. Valkenburgh, Attorney for the Child, Bath, for Violette K.
In this proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, respondent mother appeals from an order, entered upon her consent without admission, in which Family Court, inter alia, placed the subject child in petitioner's custody upon a finding that the mother neglected the child. The appeal must be dismissed. A party may not appeal from an order entered upon that party's consent ( see Matter of Selena O., 84 A.D.3d 1648, 923 N.Y.S.2d 363;Matter of Bambi C., 238 A.D.2d 942, 942–943, 661 N.Y.S.2d 551,lv. denied90 N.Y.2d 805, 663 N.Y.S.2d 511, 686 N.E.2d 223). Moreover, because the mother never moved to withdraw her consent to the entry of an order of fact-finding of neglect without admission, her contention that her consent was not knowing, voluntary and intelligent is also not properly before us ( see Matter of Julia R., 52 A.D.3d 1310, 1311, 860 N.Y.S.2d 362,lv. denied11 N.Y.3d 709, 868 N.Y.S.2d 601, 897 N.E.2d 1085;cf. Matter of Gabriella R., 68 A.D.3d 1487, 1487, 891 N.Y.S.2d 539,lv. dismissed14 N.Y.3d 812, 899 N.Y.S.2d 752, 926 N.E.2d 256).
We reject the mother's further contention that her attorney was ineffective in failing to move to withdraw her consent to the entry of the neglect order. The mother (Matter of Michael C., 82 A.D.3d 1651, 1652, 920 N.Y.S.2d 502,lv. denied17 N.Y.3d 704, 2011 WL 2535216).
It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs.
To continue reading
Request your trial- In re Brian S.
-
Komenda v. Dininny
...Prinzing, 100 A.D.3d 1507, 1508, 954 N.Y.S.2d 366,lv. denied21 N.Y.3d 851, 2013 WL 1299865;see generally Matter of Violette K. [Sheila E.K.], 96 A.D.3d 1499, 1499, 946 N.Y.S.2d 519;Matter of Fox v. Coleman, 93 A.D.3d 1187, 1187, 939 N.Y.S.2d 786). In any event, even assuming, arguendo, that......
-
In re Martha S., 327 CAF 13-01091
...entered on consent of the parties” (Matter of Carmella J., 254 A.D.2d 70, 70, 678 N.Y.S.2d 329 ; see Matter of Violette K. [Sheila E.K.], 96 A.D.3d 1499, 1499, 946 N.Y.S.2d 519 ; Matter of June MM., 62 A.D.3d 1216, 1217, 879 N.Y.S.2d 633, lv. denied 13 N.Y.3d 704, 2009 WL 2871186 ). Because......
-
In re Connor CC.
...now appeals. It is well settled that no appeal lies from an order entered upon a party's consent ( see Matter of Violette K. [Sheila E.K.], 96 A.D.3d 1499, 1499, 946 N.Y.S.2d 519 [2012];Matter of Mary UU. [Michael UU.-Marie VV.], 70 A.D.3d 1227, 1228, 893 N.Y.S.2d 908 [2010];Matter of Fanta......