From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Aaron P

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 7, 2009
61 A.D.3d 448 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)

Opinion

No. 267.

April 7, 2009.

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Clark V Richardson, J.), entered on or about November 21, 2007, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, determined that respondent father's consent was not required for the adoption of the subject children and committed custody and guardianship of the children to petitioner agency and the Commissioner of Social Services for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Robin Steinberg, The Bronx Defenders, Bronx (Gertrude Strassburger of counsel), for appellant.

Carrieri Carrieri, P.C., Mineola (Ralph R. Carrieri of counsel), for respondent.

Tamara A. Steckler, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Marcia Egger of counsel), Law Guardian.

Before: Mazzarelli, J.P., Nardelli, Buckley, Acosta and DeGrasse, JJ.


Because respondent did not maintain "substantial and continuous or repeated contact" with the children, his consent to their adoption was not required (Domestic Relations Law § 111 [d]). Respondent's admission that he made no child support payments during his incarceration from 1997 to 2002 is fatal to his claim of being a "consent father," as his incarceration did not "absolve him of his responsibility to support and maintain regular communication with the children" ( Matter of Sharissa G., 51 AD3d 1019, 1020; see Matter of Jonathan Logan P., 309 AD2d 576). Moreover, the record shows significant periods during which respondent failed to contribute support payments "of a fair and reasonable sum" when not incarcerated (Domestic Relations Law § 111 [d] [i]). Additionally, respondent failed to make any objective showing of regular communication while incarcerated ( Jonathan Logan P., 309 AD2d at 576). Respondent's testimony of regular contact with the children prior to July 1997 was muddled and largely contradictory. Even crediting that testimony, under these circumstances, such windows of regular contact did not make up for years of absence and failures to communicate ( see Matter of Jason Brian S., 303 AD2d 759, 760).


Summaries of

In re Aaron P

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 7, 2009
61 A.D.3d 448 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
Case details for

In re Aaron P

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of AARON P. and Another, Infants. JUAN C.P., Appellant…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Apr 7, 2009

Citations

61 A.D.3d 448 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 2678
877 N.Y.S.2d 30

Citing Cases

In re Jaleel G

Before: Tom, J.P., Sweeny, Catterson, McGuire and Román, JJ. Because respondent did not maintain "substantial…

Rubin Louis E. v. Jewish Child Care Ass'n of New York (In re Ali D.-E.)

red for the child Harold's adoption and that he permanently neglected and abandoned the child Rubin,…