Opinion
619 CAF 14-00455
06-12-2015
In the Matter of QUA'MEL W. Onondaga County Department of Social Services, Petitioner–Respondent. Niaya W., Respondent–Appellant.
Kelly M. Corbett, Fayetteville, for Respondent–Appellant. Gordon J. Cuffy, County Attorney, Syracuse (Maggie Seikaly of Counsel), for Petitioner–Respondent. Theodore W. Stenuf, Attorney for the Child, Minoa.
Kelly M. Corbett, Fayetteville, for Respondent–Appellant.
Gordon J. Cuffy, County Attorney, Syracuse (Maggie Seikaly of Counsel), for Petitioner–Respondent.
Theodore W. Stenuf, Attorney for the Child, Minoa.
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CARNI, LINDLEY, VALENTINO, AND WHALEN, JJ.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM:In this proceeding pursuant to Social Services Law § 384–b, respondent mother appeals from an order that terminated her parental rights with respect to the subject child on the ground of permanent neglect and transferred guardianship and custody of the child to petitioner. Contrary to the mother's contention, we conclude that petitioner established “by clear and convincing evidence that it made diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the relationship between [the mother] and the child” (Matter of Ja–Nathan F., 309 A.D.2d 1152, 1152, 764 N.Y.S.2d 894 ; see § 384–b[3][g] [i] ; [7][a] ). In coming to that conclusion, we are not unmindful that “[a]n agency must always determine the particular problems facing a parent with respect to the return of his or her child and make affirmative, repeated, and meaningful efforts to assist the parent in overcoming these handicaps” (Matter of Olivia
L., 41 A.D.3d 1226, 1226–1227, 837 N.Y.S.2d 466 [internal quotation marks omitted] ). We also recognize, however, that the agency's efforts, no matter how diligent, can be frustrated by the lack of cooperation from the parent (see Matter of Asianna NN. [Kansinya OO.], 119 A.D.3d 1243, 1244–1245, 990 N.Y.S.2d 350, lv. denied 24 N.Y.3d 907, 2014 WL 5394031 ; Matter of Jacob E. [Valerie E.], 87 A.D.3d 1317, 1318, 929 N.Y.S.2d 915 ; Matter of Ashley Lisa D., 46 A.D.3d 359, 359, 847 N.Y.S.2d 561 ), and the record establishes that such frustration of the agency's efforts occurred here. The record also establishes that, despite petitioner's diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship, the mother failed substantially and continuously to plan for the future of the child (see § 384–b [7 ][a]; Matter of Jessica P., 291 A.D.2d 935, 935, 737 N.Y.S.2d 901 ).
The mother failed to preserve for our review her contention that Family Court erred in admitting into evidence petitioner's entire case file without a proper foundation inasmuch as she failed to object to the admission of the case file on that ground (see Matter of Constance NN., 47 A.D.3d 986, 986, 849 N.Y.S.2d 328 ). Finally, the record supports the court's determination that a suspended judgment would not serve the best interests of the child (see Matter of Tiara B. [Torrence B.], 70 A.D.3d 1307, 1307, 895 N.Y.S.2d 622, lv. denied 14 N.Y.3d 709, 2010 WL 1754796 ; Matter of Emmeran M., 66 A.D.3d 1490, 1490, 885 N.Y.S.2d 813 ).
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.