In re Anthony P.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Anthony P.

39 A.D.3d 229, 831 N.Y.S.2d 711

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

DecidedApril 3, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 39 A.D.3d 229 (In re Anthony P.) 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 Anthony P., 39 A.D.3d 229, 831 N.Y.S.2d 711 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Orders of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Gloria Sosa-Lintner, J.), entered October 24, 2005, insofar as appealed from, terminating respondent’s parental rights to the subject children rather than suspending judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Respondent’s parental rights were properly terminated based on a preponderance of the evidence showing at best only sporadic compliance with the agency’s visitation schedule even after the fact-finding hearing at which respondent conceded neglect, a failure to complete a drug treatment program by the time of the dispositional hearing more than two years after the children were placed, and a nurturing foster parent in whose care the children have been since infancy and who, with the support of petitioner and the law guardian, wants to adopt them (see Matter of Albert E., 259 AD2d 315 [1999]; Matter of David J., 260 AD2d 279 [1999]). We have considered respondent’s other arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Andrias, J.E, Friedman, Marlow, Williams and Catterson, JJ.

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

Orders of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Gloria Sosa-Lintner, J.), entered October 24, 2005, insofar as appealed from, terminating respondent’s parental rights to the subject children rather than suspending judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Respondent’s parental rights were properly terminated based on a preponderance of the evidence showing at best only sporadic compliance with the agency’s visitation schedule even after the fact-finding hearing at which respondent conceded neglect, a failure to complete a drug treatment program by the time of the dispositional hearing more than two years after the children were placed, and a nurturing foster parent in whose care the children have been since infancy and who, with the support of petitioner and the law guardian, wants to adopt them (see Matter of Albert E., 259 AD2d 315 [1999]; Matter of David J., 260 AD2d 279 [1999]). We have considered respondent’s other arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Andrias, J.E, Friedman, Marlow, Williams and Catterson, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 A.D.3d 229, 831 N.Y.S.2d 711, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-anthony-p-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack