Opinion
15720-15721 Dkt. Nos. V-13569-19 NN-09569/17, B-21048/18 Case Nos. 2020-04538, 2021-2515, 2021-02430
04-14-2022
In the Matter of SANDRA M., Petitioner–Appellant, v. CHE M. (deceased), et al., Respondents–Respondents. Daisy M., a Child Under Eighteen Years of Age, etc., Che M. (deceased), et al., Respondents-Respondents, v. Administration for Children's Services, et al., Petitioners-Respondents, Sandra M., Proposed Intervenor-Appellant.
Nelson, Robinson & El Ashmawy, PLLC, New York (Daniel X. Robinson of counsel), for appellant. Joseph T. Gatti, New York, for Catholic Guardian Services, respondent. Georgia M. Pestana, Corporation Counsel, New York (Rebecca L. Visgaitis of counsel), for Administration for Children Services, respondent. Dawne A. Mitchell, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Claire V. Merkine of counsel), attorney for the child.
Nelson, Robinson & El Ashmawy, PLLC, New York (Daniel X. Robinson of counsel), for appellant.
Joseph T. Gatti, New York, for Catholic Guardian Services, respondent.
Georgia M. Pestana, Corporation Counsel, New York (Rebecca L. Visgaitis of counsel), for Administration for Children Services, respondent.
Dawne A. Mitchell, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Claire V. Merkine of counsel), attorney for the child.
Acosta, P.J., Kern, Gonza´lez, Shulman, JJ.
Appeal from order, Family Court, New York County (Karen I. Lupuloff, J.), entered on or about October 22, 2020, which dismissed the petition by the maternal grandmother for custody of the subject child, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as moot. Appeal from order, same court and Judge, entered on or about June 3, 2021, which rejected the maternal grandmother's motion to intervene in the proceedings, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as taken from a nonappealable paper and as moot.
The petition for custody of the subject child was rendered moot by the child's adoption by her long-term foster parent, finalized on June 2, 2021 (see Carmen P. v. Administration for Children's Servs., 149 A.D.3d 577, 50 N.Y.S.3d 275 [1st Dept. 2017] ). In any event, the court correctly dismissed the petition for lack of standing, as the child was already free for adoption by virtue of the death of her mother ( id. ).
No appeal lies from the court's rejection of the maternal grandmother's motion pursuant to Family Court Act § 1035(f) to intervene in the proceedings for the purpose of seeking custody of the child (see CPLR 5701[a][2] ; see also e.g. 172 Van Duzer Realty Corp. v. Globe Alumni Student Assistance Assn., Inc., 164 A.D.3d 1170, 81 N.Y.S.3d 899 [1st Dept. 2018] ). In any event, the appeal was rendered moot by the child's adoption (see generally Matter of John C., 278 A.D.2d 123, 718 N.Y.S.2d 314 [1st Dept. 2000] ).
We have considered the maternal grandmother's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.