From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In the Matter of Jose M

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 7, 2004
8 A.D.3d 385 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

2003-05442, 2003-08410.

Decided June 7, 2004.

In a proceeding pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b to terminate parental rights on the ground of abandonment, the father appeals from two orders of fact-finding and disposition of the Family Court, Queens County (Bogacz, J.), both dated May 6, 2003, which, after fact-finding and dispositional hearings, terminated his parental rights on the ground of abandonment and transferred custody and guardianship of the subject children to the petitioner Forestdale, Inc., and the Commissioner of Social Services for the City of New York for the purpose of adoption.

Robert Hausner, Mineola, N.Y., for appellant.

John R. Eyerman, New York, N.Y., for respondents.

Monica Drinane, New York, N.Y. (Gary Solomon and Sidley Austin Brown Wood, LLP [Allison E. Maue] of counsel), Law Guardian for the children.

Before: MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P., HOWARD MILLER, GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, PETER B. SKELOS, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the orders are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

A parent's incarcerated status does not excuse him or her from establishing or maintaining contact with his or her child ( see Matter of Ronald D., Jr., 282 A.D.2d 533; Matter of Shakim Ravon B., 257 A.D.2d 547; Matter of Orange County Dept. of Social Servs., 203 A.D.2d 367; Matter of Anthony M., 195 A.D.2d 315, 316). The record demonstrates that the father had no contact with the subject children during the six-month period prior to the filing of the petitions, and did not attempt to establish any contact. Contrary to the father's contention, the petitioners proved by clear and convincing evidence that he abandoned the subject children ( see Matter of Annette B., 2 A.D.3d 721; Social Services Law § 384-b[a]). Further, the Family Court properly concluded that it was in the children's best interests to terminate the father's parental rights ( see Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 N.Y.2d 136, 147-148).

The father's remaining contention is without merit.

ALTMAN, J.P., H. MILLER, GOLDSTEIN and SKELOS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

In the Matter of Jose M

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 7, 2004
8 A.D.3d 385 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

In the Matter of Jose M

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF JOSE ANDRES M. (ANONYMOUS). FORESTDALE INC., ET AL.…

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

Date published: Jun 7, 2004

Citations

8 A.D.3d 385 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
777 N.Y.S.2d 700

Citing Cases

In the Matter of Elizabeth Susanna R

Ordered that the orders of disposition are affirmed, without costs or disbursements. "A parent's incarcerated…

In re Jordan D

on appeal from so much of the order of fact-finding and disposition as relates to the child Alex Jordan D.…