Opinion
August 3, 1998
Appeal from the Family Court, Queens County (Lubow, J.).
Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order of disposition as placed the child in the care of the Commissioner of Social Services is dismissed, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,
Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs or disbursements.
The mother's appeal from so much of the order of disposition as placed the child in the care of the respondent must be dismissed as academic. The one year placement period has expired, a subsequent order extending placement has been entered on consent and a termination of parental rights proceeding has been commenced ( see, Matter of Eddie E., 219 A.D.2d 719; Matter of Angelina E., 213 A.D.2d 346).
However, although the order of disposition has expired, the adjudication of neglect constitutes a permanent and significant stigma which might indirectly affect the appellant's status in potential future proceedings. Therefore, the appeal from so much of the order of disposition as determined that the child was neglected is not academic ( see, Matter of Eddie E., 219 A.D.2d 719, supra; Matter of H. Children, 156 A.D.2d 520).
The respondent proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the child was neglected by the mother (see, Family Ct Act § 1046 [b] [i]). The evidence established that because of her mental illness the mother was unable to supply the child with adequate food or shelter and failed to consistently send the child to school ( see, Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i] [A]; Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. [Pedro F.], 212 A.D.2d 400; Matter of Catherine K, 224 A.D.2d 880; Matter of Jovann B., 153 A.D.2d 858, 859).
Bracken, J. P., Pizzuto, Altman and Luciano, JJ., concur.