Opinion
1234.1 CAF 18–00908
12-20-2019
In the MATTER OF CHARLIE C. Steuben County Department of Social Services, Petitioner–Respondent; v. Thomas C., Respondent–Appellant. (Appeal No. 1.)
ROSEMARIE RICHARDS, GILBERTSVILLE, FOR RESPONDENT–APPELLANT. DONALD S. THOMSON, BATH, FOR PETITIONER–RESPONDENT. PAUL B. WATKINS, FAIRPORT, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD.
ROSEMARIE RICHARDS, GILBERTSVILLE, FOR RESPONDENT–APPELLANT.
DONALD S. THOMSON, BATH, FOR PETITIONER–RESPONDENT.
PAUL B. WATKINS, FAIRPORT, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD.
PRESENT: CARNI, J.P., LINDLEY, CURRAN, WINSLOW, AND BANNISTER, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs.
Memorandum: In these two related termination of parental rights proceedings pursuant to Social Services Law § 384–b, respondent father appeals from four separate orders entered April 23, 2018. In the orders in appeal Nos. 1 and 3, Family Court terminated the father's parental rights with respect to the two subject children. In the orders in appeal Nos. 2 and 4, the court freed the two children for adoption.
Initially, we note that the father's contention with respect to the court's May 26, 2017 order granting summary judgment in an abuse and neglect proceeding is not properly before us on any of these four appeals, inasmuch as the May 26, 2017 order was issued in a prior, separate proceeding (see Matter of Kh'Niayah D. [Niani J.], 155 A.D.3d 1649, 1649–1650, 63 N.Y.S.3d 800 [4th Dept. 2017], lv denied 31 N.Y.3d 901, 77 N.Y.S.3d 656 [2018] ; Matter of Cornelius L.N. [Cornelius N.], 117 A.D.3d 1487, 1488, 984 N.Y.S.2d 730 [4th Dept. 2014], lv denied 24 N.Y.3d 901, 2014 WL 4357464 [2014] ; Matter of Ronald O., 43 A.D.3d 1351, 1351, 842 N.Y.S.2d 801 [4th Dept. 2007] ). Similarly, we conclude that the father's contention with respect to alleged temporary orders of protection are not properly before us inasmuch as they too were issued in a prior proceeding (see generally Kh'Niayah D. , 155 A.D.3d at 1649–1650, 63 N.Y.S.3d 800 ).
With respect to the four orders at issue in these appeals, we conclude that all four appeals must be dismissed. "It is incumbent upon an appellant to assemble a proper record, including the relevant documents that were before the lower court, and appeals will be dismissed when the record is incomplete" ( Matter of Pratt v. Anthony , 30 A.D.3d 708, 708, 815 N.Y.S.2d 832 [3d Dept. 2006] ; see Mergl v. Mergl, 19 A.D.3d 1146, 1147, 796 N.Y.S.2d 823 [4th Dept. 2005] ). Inasmuch as the father failed to include in the record on appeal the transcripts of the combined fact-finding and dispositional hearing, appeal Nos. 1 through 4 must be dismissed based on his failure to provide an adequate record (see Mergl, 19 A.D.3d at 1147, 796 N.Y.S.2d 823 ; see also Matter of Lopez v. Lugo , 115 A.D.3d 1237, 1237, 982 N.Y.S.2d 640 [4th Dept. 2014] ).