Opinion
2022–08041 Docket No. N–11782–21
05-31-2023
In the MATTER OF ERMAIUS H. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, appellant; v. Adonise H. (Anonymous), et al., respondents.
Sylvia O. Hinds–Radix, Corporation Counsel, New York, NY (Melanie T. West and Philip W. Young of counsel), for appellant. Seth Myles, Brooklyn, NY, for respondent Adonise H. Brooklyn Defender Services, Brooklyn, NY (Murtaza Husain and Jessica Marcus of counsel), for respondent Terrin J. Twyla Carter, New York, NY (Dawne A. Mitchell and Judith Stern of counsel), attorney for the child.
Sylvia O. Hinds–Radix, Corporation Counsel, New York, NY (Melanie T. West and Philip W. Young of counsel), for appellant.
Seth Myles, Brooklyn, NY, for respondent Adonise H.
Brooklyn Defender Services, Brooklyn, NY (Murtaza Husain and Jessica Marcus of counsel), for respondent Terrin J.
Twyla Carter, New York, NY (Dawne A. Mitchell and Judith Stern of counsel), attorney for the child.
COLLEEN D. DUFFY, J.P., CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, PAUL WOOTEN, DEBORAH A. DOWLING, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Melody Glover, J.), dated September 30, 2022. The order permitted the mother and the father to have two hours of unsupervised parental access with the subject child three days per week. By decision and order on motion of this Court dated November 16, 2022, enforcement of so much of the order as, in effect, permitted the mother and the father two-hour unsupervised visits with the subject child three times per week without restriction was stayed pending hearing and determination of the appeal.
ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs or disbursements.
Based on the record before us, it was an improvident exercise of discretion for the Family Court to permit the mother and the father to have two hours of unsupervised parental access with the subject child three days per week without restriction prior to the completion of the fact-finding hearing and the disposition of the pending Family Court Act article 10 proceeding (see Matter of Aliah M.J.-N. [Candace J.], 145 A.D.3d 891, 891, 42 N.Y.S.3d 828 ; Matter of Daniel O. [Jaquan O.], 141 A.D.3d 434, 33 N.Y.S.3d 894 ).
DUFFY, J.P., CHAMBERS, WOOTEN and DOWLING, JJ., concur.