In re Alejandro R.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Alejandro R.

221 A.D.2d 183, 633 N.Y.S.2d 159, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11528

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

DecidedNovember 9, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 221 A.D.2d 183 (In re Alejandro R.) 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 Alejandro R., 221 A.D.2d 183, 633 N.Y.S.2d 159, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11528 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from decision, Family Court, New York County (Judith Sheindlin, J.), [184]*184dated March 1, 1990, which denied respondent’s oral application to vacate orders of disposition dated September 15 and October 31,1989, terminating her parental rights to the subject children, without prejudice to her making a written motion for such relief, unanimously dismissed as taken from a nonappealable paper, without costs.

The ruling which respondent would have us review is contained in an unsigned, unentered transcript of the March 1, 1990 proceedings, and, as such, is nonappealable (CPLR 5512 [a]; 2219 [b]; Matter of Grosso v Slade, 179 AD2d 585; Matter of Grisi v Shainswit, 119 AD2d 418, 420). In any event, on the merits, respondent failed to demonstrate a meritorious defense to the abandonment proceeding (CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Matter of Celeste M., 180 AD2d 437), that she could have been served by a method other than publication (Family Ct Act § 617 [b]), or that her attorney was ineffective. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach, Asch and Tom, JJ.

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

—Appeal from decision, Family Court, New York County (Judith Sheindlin, J.), [184]*184dated March 1, 1990, which denied respondent’s oral application to vacate orders of disposition dated September 15 and October 31,1989, terminating her parental rights to the subject children, without prejudice to her making a written motion for such relief, unanimously dismissed as taken from a nonappealable paper, without costs.

The ruling which respondent would have us review is contained in an unsigned, unentered transcript of the March 1, 1990 proceedings, and, as such, is nonappealable (CPLR 5512 [a]; 2219 [b]; Matter of Grosso v Slade, 179 AD2d 585; Matter of Grisi v Shainswit, 119 AD2d 418, 420). In any event, on the merits, respondent failed to demonstrate a meritorious defense to the abandonment proceeding (CPLR 5015 [a] [1]; Matter of Celeste M., 180 AD2d 437), that she could have been served by a method other than publication (Family Ct Act § 617 [b]), or that her attorney was ineffective. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach, Asch and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

221 A.D.2d 183, 633 N.Y.S.2d 159, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11528, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-alejandro-r-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack