From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Natasha Denise B. v. Leake & Watts Servs., Inc.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Mar 12, 2013
104 A.D.3d 457 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)

Opinion

2013-03-12

In re NATASHA DENISE B., etc., and Others, Children Under Eighteen Years of Age, etc., Montricia Denise C., etc., Respondent–Appellant, Leake & Watts Services, Inc., Petitioner–Respondent.

Julian A. Hertz, Larchmont, for appellant. Rosin Steinhagen Mendel, New York (Douglas H. Reiniger of counsel), for respondent.



Julian A. Hertz, Larchmont, for appellant. Rosin Steinhagen Mendel, New York (Douglas H. Reiniger of counsel), for respondent.
Andrew H. Rossmer, Bronx, attorney for the children.

SWEENY, J.P., MOSKOWITZ, ABDUS–SALAAM, ROMÁN, FEINMAN, JJ.

Orders, Family Court, Bronx County (Monica Drinane, J.), entered on or about April 12, 2012, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, following a fact-finding hearing, determined that respondent-appellant mother had permanently neglected the subject children, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The findings of permanent neglect were supported by clear and convincing evidence ( seeSocial Services Law § 384–b[7][a] ). The record shows that petitioner agency exercised diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship by, among other things, assisting respondent in filling out applications for housing, reminding her of the importance of submitting the additional documents required to complete the applications, referring her for mental health services, scheduling visitation, and planning for a trial discharge of the children to her care. Despite these efforts, respondent failed to plan for the children's future during the relevant time period ( id.). Indeed, the record shows that respondent failed to obtain suitable housing or complete a mental health examination, even though she had been advised that her compliance with these services was required before the children could be returned to her care ( see Matter of Ernie Luis T. [Enid F.], 100 A.D.3d 475, 475, 953 N.Y.S.2d 508 [1st Dept. 2012] ). In addition, although respondent completed parenting courses, on several occasions during the relevant time period she failed to call the agency or take the children to the hospital after they were injured, even though the agency told her to do so because of a potentially fatal medical condition of one of the children ( see Matter of Atreyu Rashawn G., 254 A.D.2d 215, 216, 679 N.Y.S.2d 129 [1st Dept. 1998] ).

We have considered respondent's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.


Summaries of

Natasha Denise B. v. Leake & Watts Servs., Inc.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Mar 12, 2013
104 A.D.3d 457 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
Case details for

Natasha Denise B. v. Leake & Watts Servs., Inc.

Case Details

Full title:In re NATASHA DENISE B., etc., and Others, Children Under Eighteen Years…

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

Date published: Mar 12, 2013

Citations

104 A.D.3d 457 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
104 A.D.3d 457
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 1491