From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Lakshmi G.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Oct 31, 2013
110 A.D.3d 640 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)

Opinion

2013-10-31

In re LAKSHMI G., A Child Under Eighteen Years of Age, etc., Jose V., etc., Respondent–Appellant, Administration for Children's Services, Petitioner–Respondent.

Tennille M. Tatum–Evans, New York, for appellant. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Marta Ross of counsel), for respondent.



Tennille M. Tatum–Evans, New York, for appellant. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Marta Ross of counsel), for respondent.
MAZZARELLI, J.P., RENWICK, DeGRASSE, GISCHE, JJ.

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Carol R. Sherman, J.), entered on or about May 29, 2012, which, upon a fact-finding determination of neglect, placed the subject child in the custody of petitioner until the next permanency hearing, unanimously affirmed, insofar as it brings up for review the fact-finding determination, and the appeal therefrom otherwise dismissed as moot, without costs. Appeal from the fact-finding order, same court and Judge, entered on or about March 5, 2012, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the order of disposition.

The court properly found that petitioner proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the father neglected the child by leaving her in the care of the mother, who admitted to him that she was experiencing hallucinations and hearing voices for more than a year, and who later threw the seven-week old child to the pavement, after asserting that she saw a light in the sky and a chariot with a figure, which were signs from God, and that the child was “possessed.” A reasonably prudent parent would not have left the child in the care of the mother, given her mental state ( see Matter of Joseph Benjamin P. [Allen P.], 81 A.D.3d 415, 416, 916 N.Y.S.2d 50 [1st Dept.2011], lv. denied16 N.Y.3d 710, 2011 WL 1584857 [2011] ).

The appeal from the dispositional portion of the order is moot since the placementterms of the order have expired ( see Matter of Isaiah M. [Antoya M.], 96 A.D.3d 516, 946 N.Y.S.2d 856 [1st Dept.2012] ).


Summaries of

In re Lakshmi G.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Oct 31, 2013
110 A.D.3d 640 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
Case details for

In re Lakshmi G.

Case Details

Full title:In re LAKSHMI G., A Child Under Eighteen Years of Age, etc., Jose V.…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Oct 31, 2013

Citations

110 A.D.3d 640 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
974 N.Y.S.2d 60
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 7125

Citing Cases

In re Nevaeh C.

Neglect has also been found under FCA § 1012(f)(i)(B) where a parent leaves a child with another person who…

In re Nevaeh C.

Neglect has also been found under FCA §1012(f)(i)(B) where a parent leaves a child with another person who is…