Opinion
532070
02-17-2022
In the MATTER OF ZELDA UU., Alleged to be a Neglected Child. Schoharie County Department of Social Services, Respondent; v. Amanda VV. et al., Respondents. Attorney for the Child, Appellant.
Veronica Reed, Schenectady, attorney for the child, appellant. Schoharie County Department of Social Services, Schoharie (David P. Lapinel of counsel), for Schoharie County Department of Social Services, respondent. Barrett D. Mack, Albany, for Amanda VV., respondent. Mark J. Gaylord, Schenectady, for Samuel UU., respondent.
Veronica Reed, Schenectady, attorney for the child, appellant.
Schoharie County Department of Social Services, Schoharie (David P. Lapinel of counsel), for Schoharie County Department of Social Services, respondent.
Barrett D. Mack, Albany, for Amanda VV., respondent.
Mark J. Gaylord, Schenectady, for Samuel UU., respondent.
Before: Garry, P.J., Egan Jr., Aarons and Colangelo, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Aarons, J. Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Schoharie County (Bartlett III, J.), entered July 24, 2020, which, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Ct Act article 10, temporarily removed the subject child from temporary placement. Respondents are the parents of a child (born in 2020). Two days after the child's birth, respondents consented to a temporary placement of the child in petitioner's care and custody. Petitioner thereafter commenced this proceeding alleging that respondents neglected the child. At the request of the attorney for the child (hereinafter AFC), a hearing under Family Ct Act § 1027(a)(ii) was then held. After the hearing started, the parties agreed to adjourn it so that petitioner could investigate possibly placing the child with the child's maternal aunt and uncle. When the hearing resumed, the parties stipulated that the child would be placed with the maternal aunt and uncle. Approximately three months later, petitioner moved, via order to show cause, to have the child removed from the care of the maternal aunt and uncle and placed in its care and custody. Petitioner subsequently submitted an amended motion seeking essentially the same relief as the original one. The AFC opposed the amended motion. In a July 2020 order, Family Court granted the amended motion. The AFC appeals.
Respondents did not submit any formal written opposition papers and instead orally opposed the amended motion.
The AFC has advised this Court that, in September 2021, respondents executed conditional surrenders of their parental rights and that the permanency goal was changed to freeing the child for adoption. In view of this, the AFC's appeal from the July 2020 order has been rendered moot (see Matter of Nevaeh A. [Shannon D.], 144 A.D.3d 1431, 1431, 41 N.Y.S.3d 436 [2016] ; Matter of Riley II. [Sierra II.], 68 A.D.3d 1312, 1313, 890 N.Y.S.2d 178 [2009] ). Contrary to the AFC's assertion, the exception to the mootness doctrine does not apply (see Matter of Tyrell FF. [Jaquasisa GG.], 166 A.D.3d 1331, 1332–1333, 88 N.Y.S.3d 640 [2018], appeal dismissed 33 N.Y.3d 1063, 104 N.Y.S.3d 45, 128 N.E.3d 172 [2019] ; Matter of Eyon X. [Ashley W.], 163 A.D.3d 1145, 1146, 76 N.Y.S.3d 429 [2018] ).
Garry, P.J., Egan Jr. and Colangelo, JJ., concur.
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.