In re Aisha T.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Aisha T.

55 A.D.3d 435, 866 N.Y.S.2d 628

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

DecidedOctober 23, 2008

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 55 A.D.3d 435 (In re Aisha T.) 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

In re Aisha T., 55 A.D.3d 435, 866 N.Y.S.2d 628 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Sara R Schechter, J.), entered on or about September 18, 2007, which, to the extent appealed from, upon a finding of permanent neglect, terminated respondent mother’s parental rights to the subject child and committed custody and guardianship of the child to petitioner agency and the Commissioner of Social Services for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

[436]*436The finding of permanent neglect was supported by clear and convincing evidence (Social Services Law § 384-b [7] [a]). The record establishes that the agency made diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship by providing assistance so that respondent could meet her legal residency, housing, financial and employment needs, and by scheduling regular visits with the child (see Matter of William P., 23 AD3d 237 [2005]). Despite these diligent efforts, respondent failed to establish permanent legal residency, secure a suitable home environment, or obtain employment before the petition was filed. She was also inconsistent in her visitation, and at one point, failed for a period of approximately three months to have any contact with the child or the agency (see Matter of Lenny R., 22 AD3d 240 [2005], lv denied 6 NY3d 708 [2006]).

The court appropriately declined to enter a suspended judgment in lieu of terminating respondent’s parental rights, as suspending judgment was not in the child’s best interests. The child, now five years old, has bonded with her foster family with whom she has lived since she was four days old, and “there was no evidence of a parental relationship with [respondent] sufficient to justify delay of the adoptive process” (Matter of Jazminn O’Dell P., 39 AD3d 235 [2007]).

We have considered respondent’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Lippman, EJ., Saxe, Friedman, Sweeny and Acosta, JJ.

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

Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Sara R Schechter, J.), entered on or about September 18, 2007, which, to the extent appealed from, upon a finding of permanent neglect, terminated respondent mother’s parental rights to the subject child and committed custody and guardianship of the child to petitioner agency and the Commissioner of Social Services for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

[436]*436The finding of permanent neglect was supported by clear and convincing evidence (Social Services Law § 384-b [7] [a]). The record establishes that the agency made diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship by providing assistance so that respondent could meet her legal residency, housing, financial and employment needs, and by scheduling regular visits with the child (see Matter of William P., 23 AD3d 237 [2005]). Despite these diligent efforts, respondent failed to establish permanent legal residency, secure a suitable home environment, or obtain employment before the petition was filed. She was also inconsistent in her visitation, and at one point, failed for a period of approximately three months to have any contact with the child or the agency (see Matter of Lenny R., 22 AD3d 240 [2005], lv denied 6 NY3d 708 [2006]).

The court appropriately declined to enter a suspended judgment in lieu of terminating respondent’s parental rights, as suspending judgment was not in the child’s best interests. The child, now five years old, has bonded with her foster family with whom she has lived since she was four days old, and “there was no evidence of a parental relationship with [respondent] sufficient to justify delay of the adoptive process” (Matter of Jazminn O’Dell P., 39 AD3d 235 [2007]).

We have considered respondent’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Lippman, EJ., Saxe, Friedman, Sweeny and Acosta, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

55 A.D.3d 435, 866 N.Y.S.2d 628, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-aisha-t-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack