Opinion
2012-06-20
In the Matter of JULIAN J.C. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, et al., petitioners-respondents; Juan C. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent.
Rhonda R. Weir, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant. Quinlan and Fields, Hawthorne, N.Y. (Ian Fields and Daniel Gartenstein of counsel), for petitioner-respondent New York Foundling Hospital.
Rhonda R. Weir, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant. Quinlan and Fields, Hawthorne, N.Y. (Ian Fields and Daniel Gartenstein of counsel), for petitioner-respondent New York Foundling Hospital.
Gerard P. Nolan, Brooklyn, N.Y., attorney for the child.
In a proceeding pursuant to Social Services Law § 384–b to terminate parental rights, the father appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of fact-finding and disposition of the Family Court, Kings County (Olshansky, J.), dated March 14, 2011, as, after fact-finding and dispositional hearings, determined that his consent to the subject adoption was not required, and transferred the rights of custody and guardianship of the subject child to the New York City Children's Service and the New York Foundling Hospital for the purpose of adoption.
ORDERED that the order of fact-finding and disposition is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
The Family Court's determination that the father's consent to the adoption of the subject child was not required is supported by clear and convincing evidence ( see Matter of Jaden Dasani–Amru B. [ Roy Alphonso B.], 74 A.D.3d 801, 901 N.Y.S.2d 525). The father failed to meet his burden of establishing that he maintained substantial and continuous or repeated contact with the child through the payment of support and either regular visitation or other communication with the child ( seeDomestic Relations Law § 111[1][d]; Matter of Seasia D., 10 N.Y.3d 879, 880, 860 N.Y.S.2d 760, 890 N.E.2d 875,cert. denied sub nom. Kareem W. v. Mr. & Mrs. Anonymous, 555 U.S. 1046, 129 S.Ct. 629, 172 L.Ed.2d 610;Matter of Sharissa G., 51 A.D.3d 1019, 859 N.Y.S.2d 246;Matter of Hassan Lawrence W., 42 A.D.3d 573, 840 N.Y.S.2d 140).
The Family Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in declining the father's request for an adjournment prior to making a disposition in this matter, since the record fails to demonstrate any “good cause shown” for an adjournment (Family Ct. Act § 626[a]; see Matter of Williams D. [ Vernetta Bernadett D.], 82 A.D.3d 882, 918 N.Y.S.2d 382).
The father's remaining contentions are improperly raised for the first time on appeal ( see Matter of Marcena S., 103 A.D.2d 847, 478 N.Y.S.2d 348).