From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Megan Victoria

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 5, 2011
84 A.D.3d 472 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)

Opinion

Nos. 4989, 4989A, 4989B, 4989C.

May 5, 2011.

Orders of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Sidney Gribetz, J.), entered on or about April 3, 2009, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, upon a finding of permanent neglect, terminated respondent mother's parental rights to the subject children and committed their custody to the Commissioner of Social Services and petitioner agency for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Frederic P. Schneider, New York, for appellant.

Law Office of Quinlan and Fields, Hawthorne (Daniel Gartenstein of counsel), for respondent.

Steven N. Feinman, White Plains, attorney for the children.

Before: Concur — Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Acosta, DeGrasse and Roman, JJ.


The finding of permanent neglect was supported by clear and convincing evidence of respondent's failure to plan for the children's future, notwithstanding the petitioning agency's diligent efforts (Social Services Law § 384-b [a]; see Matter of Sheila G., 61 NY2d 368). The agency's diligent efforts were demonstrated by, inter alia, the development of a service plan; the scheduling of visitation; repeated attempts to encourage the mother's compliance with the service plan requirements and provision of referrals for services ( see Matter of Lady Justice L., 50 AD3d 425; Matter of Gina Rachel L., 44 AD3d 367). The agency's duty to exercise diligent efforts is subject to reason and does not require that the agency "guarantee that the parent succeed in overcoming his or her predicaments" ( Sheila G., 61 NY2d at 385). The mother, who did not complete a drug treatment program despite several referrals and stopped attending mental health therapy, failed to plan for the children's future by failing to avail herself of the requisite services ( see Matter of Racquel Olivia M., 37 AD3d 279, lv denied 8 NY3d 812).

The court properly addressed the agency's motion to suspend the mother's visitation with the children. Moreover, this issue was raised for the first time on appeal, and, in any event, there is no evidence of any prejudice to the mother in connection with that motion.


Summaries of

In re Megan Victoria

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 5, 2011
84 A.D.3d 472 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
Case details for

In re Megan Victoria

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of MEGAN VICTORIA C-S. and Others, Children Alleged to be…

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

Date published: May 5, 2011

Citations

84 A.D.3d 472 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 3733
922 N.Y.S.2d 360

Citing Cases

Mercedes S. v. New Alternatives for Children (In re Elijah S.)

Respondent also failed to address the problems that led to the children's removal, including her failure to…

In re Elijah S.

Respondent also failed to address the problems that led to the children's removal, including her failure to…