From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gail UU v. Constance UU

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Jul 3, 2019
174 A.D.3d 976 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)

Opinion

526284

07-03-2019

In the Matter of GAIL UU., Appellant, v. CONSTANCE UU. et al., Respondents. (And Another Related Proceeding.)

David Brickman, Albany, for appellant.


David Brickman, Albany, for appellant.

Before: Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Aarons, Rumsey and Pritzker, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Aarons, J. Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Albany County (Maney, J.), entered April 10, 2017, which, among other things, dismissed petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Ct Act article 6, for custody of the subject child.

Petitioner (hereinafter the grandmother) is the maternal grandparent of the subject child (born in 2013). Respondent Albany County Department of Children, Youth and Families (hereinafter DCYF) commenced a proceeding in June 2016 to remove the child from respondent Constance UU. (hereinafter the mother). The mother consented to the child's removal, and the child was placed in the custody of the grandmother. DCYF thereafter commenced a neglect proceeding against the mother, and, in August 2016, the child was placed in DCYF's custody and care. The grandmother thereafter commenced a proceeding seeking custody of the child. A joint hearing was held on DCYF's neglect petition and the grandmother's custody petition, after which Family Court found that returning the child to the mother and giving the grandmother custody of the child would not serve the child's best interests. Accordingly, the court, among other things, dismissed the grandmother's petition in an April 2017 order. The grandmother appeals.

This Court has been advised that, during the pendency of this appeal, the child was adopted. In view of this, the grandmother's appeal is moot (see Matter of Gricel R. v. Felix R., 163 A.D.3d 824, 824, 79 N.Y.S.3d 658 [2018] ; Matter of Carmen P. v. Administration for Children's Servs., 149 A.D.3d 577, 577, 50 N.Y.S.3d 275 [2017] ). Given that the exception to the mootness doctrine does not apply (see generally Matter of Hearst Corp. v. Clyne, 50 N.Y.2d 707, 714–715, 431 N.Y.S.2d 400, 409 N.E.2d 876 [1980] ), the appeal must be dismissed.

Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Rumsey and Pritzker, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.


Summaries of

Gail UU v. Constance UU

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Jul 3, 2019
174 A.D.3d 976 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
Case details for

Gail UU v. Constance UU

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of GAIL UU., Appellant, v. CONSTANCE UU. et al.…

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

Date published: Jul 3, 2019

Citations

174 A.D.3d 976 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
101 N.Y.S.3d 681
2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 5351

Citing Cases

Larry DD. v. Tonya EE.

As the mother's rights and interests in the children have been divested, she will not be directly affected by…