In re Amanda S.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Amanda S.

255 A.D.2d 1009, 679 N.Y.S.2d 774, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12327

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

DecidedNovember 13, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 255 A.D.2d 1009 (In re Amanda S.) 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 Amanda S., 255 A.D.2d 1009, 679 N.Y.S.2d 774, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12327 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: After filing a petition alleging neglect against respondents, petitioner requested a preliminary order of supervision. Family Court Act § 1027 (a) provides for a hearing on that request to determine whether “the child [ren]’s interests require protection pending a final order of disposition”, and Family Court must set forth the reasons for its determination (see, Family Ct Act § 1027 [fl). Reversal is not required by the court’s failure to hold a hearing, however, because respondents waived their right to one. In response to the court’s offer to hold a hearing on the issue of the preliminary order, respondents’ attorney stated, “[Wje’re not choosing to pursue that route.” (Appeal from Order of Erie County Family Court, Szczur, J. — Neglect.) Present — Pine, J. P., Hayes, Wisner, Pigott, Jr., and Boehm, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: After filing a petition alleging neglect against respondents, petitioner requested a preliminary order of supervision. Family Court Act § 1027 (a) provides for a hearing on that request to determine whether “the child [ren]’s interests require protection pending a final order of disposition”, and Family Court must set forth the reasons for its determination (see, Family Ct Act § 1027 [fl). Reversal is not required by the court’s failure to hold a hearing, however, because respondents waived their right to one. In response to the court’s offer to hold a hearing on the issue of the preliminary order, respondents’ attorney stated, “[Wje’re not choosing to pursue that route.” (Appeal from Order of Erie County Family Court, Szczur, J. — Neglect.) Present — Pine, J. P., Hayes, Wisner, Pigott, Jr., and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

255 A.D.2d 1009, 679 N.Y.S.2d 774, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12327, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-amanda-s-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack