From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In the Matter of Jaime D

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 3, 2002
295 A.D.2d 346 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

99-11929, 99-11932

Submitted May 6, 2002

June 3, 2002

In three related neglect proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the father appeals from (1) an order of fact-finding and disposition (one paper) of the Family Court, Rockland County (Garvey, J.), dated November 15, 1999, which, after a hearing, determined that he had neglected his three children, placed them in the custody of their mother until October 5, 2000, and directed him to comply with an order of protection of the same court, also dated November 15, 1999, and (2) the order of protection dated November 15, 1999, which directed him to remain away from the children and their residence, except for supervised visitation, until October 5, 2000.

Alicia M. Crowe, New City, N.Y., for appellant.

Patricia Zugibe, County Attorney, New City, N.Y. (Shelley A. Forde of counsel), for respondent.

DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, DANIEL F. LUCIANO, JJ.


ORDERED that the appeal from the order of protection and the appeal from so much of the order of fact-finding and disposition as placed the children in the custody of the mother until October 5, 2000, and directed him to comply with the order of protection are dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,

ORDERED that the order of fact-finding and disposition is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs or disbursements.

The father's appeal from the order of protection dated November 15, 1999, and from so much of the order of fact-finding and disposition as placed the children in the custody of the mother and directed him to comply with the order of protection, must be dismissed as academic because the orders have expired by their own terms (see Matter of Danielle S., 282 A.D.2d 680; Matter of Susan B., 264 A.D.2d 478). Nevertheless, the adjudication of neglect has not been rendered academic (see Matter of Eddie E., 219 A.D.2d 719; Matter of H. Children, 156 A.D.2d 520).

We have reviewed the record and agree with the father's assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel's application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted (see Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738; Matter of Alexis B., 292 A.D.2d 604 [2d Dept, March 25, 2002]; Matter of M. Children, 286 A.D.2d 736).

RITTER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, FRIEDMANN and LUCIANO, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

In the Matter of Jaime D

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 3, 2002
295 A.D.2d 346 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

In the Matter of Jaime D

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF JAIME D. (ANONYMOUS). CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES OF…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jun 3, 2002

Citations

295 A.D.2d 346 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
743 N.Y.S.2d 882

Citing Cases

In re Tali W.

ORDERED that the appeal from the fact-finding order entered February 22, 2001, is dismissed, without costs or…

In Re: Matthew C

DECISION ORDER ORDERED that the appeal from so much of the order of fact-finding and disposition as directed…