G, VONDAJIA P., MTR. OF

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

G, VONDAJIA P., MTR. OF

81 A.D.3d 1317, 916 N.Y.S.2d 560

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 10, 2011·No. CAF 10-00390·Published

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Erie County (Fatricia A. Maxwell, J.), entered February 2, 2010 in a proceeding pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b. The order terminated respondent’s parental rights.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Respondent mother appeals from an order terminating her parental rights with respect to four of her children. Contrary to the contentions of the mother and the Attorney for the Child on behalf of Vondajia P.G., Family Court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to issue a suspended judgment. The record supports the court’s determination that a suspended judgment, i.e., “a brief grace period designed to prepare the parent to be reunited with the children]” (Matter of Michael B., 80 NY2d 299, 311 [1992]), was not in the children’s best interests (see generally Matter of Shadazia W., 52 AD3d 1330 [2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 706 [2008]; Matter of Da’Nasjeion T., 32 AD3d 1242 [2006]). Present — Smith, J.P., Carni, Sconiers, Green and Gorski, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Erie County (Fatricia A. Maxwell, J.), entered February 2, 2010 in a proceeding pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b. The order terminated respondent’s parental rights.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Respondent mother appeals from an order terminating her parental rights with respect to four of her children. Contrary to the contentions of the mother and the Attorney for the Child on behalf of Vondajia P.G., Family Court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to issue a suspended judgment. The record supports the court’s determination that a suspended judgment, i.e., “a brief grace period designed to prepare the parent to be reunited with the children]” (Matter of Michael B., 80 NY2d 299, 311 [1992]), was not in the children’s best interests (see generally Matter of Shadazia W., 52 AD3d 1330 [2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 706 [2008]; Matter of Da’Nasjeion T., 32 AD3d 1242 [2006]). Present — Smith, J.P., Carni, Sconiers, Green and Gorski, JJ.

G, VONDAJIA P., MTR. OF, 81 A.D.3d 1317, 916 N.Y.S.2d 560 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

81 A.D.3d 1317 (G, VONDAJIA P., MTR. OF) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related