Opinion
07-01-2016
In the Matter of the ADOPTION OF HALY S.W. Wayne J.W. and Amanda M.W., Petitioners–Respondents; Matthew C., Respondent–Appellant, and Oneida County Department of Social Services, Respondent–Respondent.
John J. Raspante, Utica, for Respondent–Appellant. Koslosky & Koslosky, Utica (William L. Koslosky of Counsel), for Petitioners–Respondents. John P. Amuso, Attorney for the Child, Clinton.
Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Oneida County (Louis P. Gigliotti, A.J.), entered March 17, 2015. The order, among other things, adjudged that the best interests of the subject child will be promoted by the adoption of the child by petitioners.
John J. Raspante, Utica, for Respondent–Appellant.
Koslosky & Koslosky, Utica (William L. Koslosky of Counsel), for Petitioners–Respondents.
John P. Amuso, Attorney for the Child, Clinton.
MEMORANDUM: In this adoption proceeding, Matthew C. (respondent), a biological father entitled to notice of the adoption, appeals from an order determining that the best interests of the subject child will be promoted by her adoption by petitioners, the child's foster parents. Preliminarily, we note that, contrary to respondent's contention, the gaps in the hearing transcript attributable to inaudible portions of the audio recording are not so significant as to preclude our review of the order on appeal (see Matter of Van Court v. Wadsworth, 122 A.D.3d 1339, 1340, 996 N.Y.S.2d 448, lv. denied 24 N.Y.3d 916, 2015 WL 652170 ). Contrary to respondent's further contention, Family Court's bench decision adequately sets forth the grounds for its determination (see Matter of Jose L.I., 46 N.Y.2d 1024, 1025–1026, 416 N.Y.S.2d 537, 389 N.E.2d 1059 ; Matter of Zarhianna K. [Frank K.], 133 A.D.3d 1368, 1369, 19 N.Y.S.3d 465 ; cf. Matter of Rocco v. Rocco, 78 A.D.3d 1670, 1671, 910 N.Y.S.2d 826 ). In any event, the record is sufficient to permit us to make our own findings (see Matter of Dubuque v. Bremiller, 79 A.D.3d 1743, 1744, 913 N.Y.S.2d 855 ), and we conclude that the court's determination that adoption by petitioners is in the child's best interests is supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see Matter of Sjuqwan Anthony Zion Perry M. [Charnise Antonia M.], 111 A.D.3d 473, 474, 975 N.Y.S.2d 387, lv. denied 22 N.Y.3d 864, 2014 WL 1281926 ; see generally Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 N.Y.2d 136, 147–148, 481 N.Y.S.2d 26, 470 N.E.2d 824 ).
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
WHALEN, P.J., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, DeJOSEPH, and NEMOYER, JJ., concur.