Opinion
2012-07-5
In the Matter of ROBERT JORDAN G. (Anonymous). Westchester County Department of Social Services, respondent; Robert D. (Anonymous), appellant.
Helene Migdon Greenberg, Elmsford, N.Y., for appellant. Robert F. Meehan, County Attorney, White Plains, N.Y. (Adam Rodriguez of counsel), for respondent.
Helene Migdon Greenberg, Elmsford, N.Y., for appellant. Robert F. Meehan, County Attorney, White Plains, N.Y. (Adam Rodriguez of counsel), for respondent.
Maria J. Frank, Yorktown Heights, N.Y., attorney for the child.
In a proceeding pursuant to Social Services Law § 383–c for the judicial surrender of the subject child for the purpose of adoption, the father appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Family Court, Westchester County (Schauer, J.), entered March 10, 2011, as, determined that he voluntarily consented to the conditional surrender of the subject child and approved his conditional surrender of the child.
ORDERED that the appeal from so much of the order as approved the conditional surrender of the subject child is dismissed, without costs and disbursements, as the father is not aggrieved by that portion of the order ( seeCPLR 5511); and it is further,
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs or disbursements.
“A surrender of parental rights ‘becomes final and irrevocable immediately upon its execution and acknowledgment [and], in the absence of fraud, duress or coercion, no action may be maintained by the surrendering parent to revoke or annul the surrender agreement’ ” (Matter of Gino Z. [ Albert Z.], 4 A.D.3d 631, 632, 771 N.Y.S.2d 735, quoting Matter of Amanda B., 206 A.D.2d 636, 636–637, 614 N.Y.S.2d 607;seeSocial Services Law § 383–c[6][d] ). Here, the record supports the Family Court's determination that the father's conditional surrender of his parental rights was voluntary, and that he was mentally competent to execute the surrender instrument. The court made a careful inquiry regarding the father's state of mind and understanding of the legal consequences of his actions, including granting him an adjournment of more than one month to further consider his decision ( see Matter of Amanda B., 206 A.D.2d at 637, 614 N.Y.S.2d 607;Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. of Suffolk County [ Sandra G.], 141 A.D.2d 821, 822–823, 529 N.Y.S.2d 883).
The father is not aggrieved by so much of the order as approved his conditional surrender of the subject child because that portion of the order was entered upon his consent ( seeCPLR 5511; Matter of Enasysia Tylesha R. [ April Deann R.], 83 A.D.3d 946, 947, 920 N.Y.S.2d 712), which we have concluded was validly obtained. Accordingly, the appeal from that portion of the order must be dismissed.