Opinion
2013-03-27
In the Matter of BARBARA N. (Anonymous), appellant; Robert Doar, etc., respondent.
Mark Diamond, New York, N.Y., for appellant. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Larry A. Sonnenshein and Diana Lawless of counsel), for respondent.
Mark Diamond, New York, N.Y., for appellant. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Larry A. Sonnenshein and Diana Lawless of counsel), for respondent.
RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P., CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, SHERI S. ROMAN, and SYLVIA HINDS–RADIX, JJ.
In a proceeding pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law article 81 to appoint a guardian for the personal needs and property management of Barbara N., an alleged incapacitated person, Barbara N. appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Baily–Schiffman, J.), dated October 20, 2011, and (2) an order and judgment (one paper) of the same court, also dated October 20, 2011, which, after the hearing, granted the petition and appointed a guardian for her personal needs and property management.
ORDERED that the appeal from the order is dismissed, without costs or disbursements,as the order was superseded by the order and judgment; and it is further,
ORDERED that the order and judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The petitioner demonstrated that the appointment of a guardian for Barbara N. (hereinafter the appellant), the alleged incapacitated person, was necessary to provide for her personal needs and to manage her property and financial affairs ( seeMental Hygiene Law § 81.02[a][1]; Matter of Barbara S. [Lenora S.], 99 A.D.3d 1008, 952 N.Y.S.2d 472). The petitioner further established, by clear and convincing evidence, that the appellant was likely to suffer harm because she was unable to provide for her personal needs and management of her property, and could not adequately understand and appreciate the nature and consequences of such inability ( seeMental Hygiene Law § 81.02[b][1], [2]; Matter of Sandra S., 13 A.D.3d 637, 786 N.Y.S.2d 349).
The appellant's remaining contentions are without merit.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the petition and appointed a guardian for the appellant's personal needs and property management ( see Matter of Barbara S. [Lenora S.], 99 A.D.3d 1008, 952 N.Y.S.2d 472).