Holly SS v. John SS

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Holly SS v. John SS

57 A.D.2d 681, 393 N.Y.S.2d 821, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11714

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 28, 1977

StatusPublished

This text of 57 A.D.2d 681 (Holly SS v. John SS) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Holly SS v. John SS, 57 A.D.2d 681, 393 N.Y.S.2d 821, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11714 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Essex County, entered May 18, 1976, which sustained the petition for the adoption [682]*682of appellant’s natural child without his consent. The testimony demonstrates that there was little contact between the appellant and his daughter from the time of her birth on September 2, 1970. Despite a court order of support, only one payment was made. Appellant’s last attempt to visit his child was in 1972, when he objected to the mother’s conditions. For at least two years prior to the trial, appellant made no attempt to see his daughter. Cards, presents and telephone calls were virtually nonexistent. Under such circumstances, we see no reason to disturb the trial court’s finding that appellant had "abandoned” his daughter within the meaning of section 111 of the Domestic Relations Law and that his consent to her adoption was, therefore, unnecessary (Matter of Corey L v Martin L, 55 AD2d 717; Matter of Wendy B v Ronald B, 53 AD2d 160). Order affirmed, with costs. Koreman, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Mahoney and Larkin, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Essex County, entered May 18, 1976, which sustained the petition for the adoption [682]*682of appellant’s natural child without his consent. The testimony demonstrates that there was little contact between the appellant and his daughter from the time of her birth on September 2, 1970. Despite a court order of support, only one payment was made. Appellant’s last attempt to visit his child was in 1972, when he objected to the mother’s conditions. For at least two years prior to the trial, appellant made no attempt to see his daughter. Cards, presents and telephone calls were virtually nonexistent. Under such circumstances, we see no reason to disturb the trial court’s finding that appellant had "abandoned” his daughter within the meaning of section 111 of the Domestic Relations Law and that his consent to her adoption was, therefore, unnecessary (Matter of Corey L v Martin L, 55 AD2d 717; Matter of Wendy B v Ronald B, 53 AD2d 160). Order affirmed, with costs. Koreman, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Mahoney and Larkin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 A.D.2d 681, 393 N.Y.S.2d 821, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11714, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holly-ss-v-john-ss-nyappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack