In re Booker Tony F.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Booker Tony F.

232 A.D.2d 413, 648 N.Y.S.2d 329, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9889

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

DecidedOctober 7, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 232 A.D.2d 413 (In re Booker Tony F.) 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 Booker Tony F., 232 A.D.2d 413, 648 N.Y.S.2d 329, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9889 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b, inter alia, to terminate the parental rights of Toni F., the appeal is from so much of an order of disposition of the Family Court, Queens County (Gage, J.), dated May 25, 1995, as, after fact-finding and dispositional hearings, terminated her parental rights.

Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs and disbursements.

Upon reviewing the record, we find that termination of the mother’s parental rights was supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see, Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 NY2d 136, 147; Matter of Gerald M., 112 AD2d 6). The Family Court acted within its discretion by refusing to suspend judgment (see, Family Ct Act §§ 631, 633; see also, Matter of Michael B., 80 NY2d 299). O’Brien, J. P., Copertino, Pizzuto and Hart, JJ., concur.

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

—In a proceeding pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b, inter alia, to terminate the parental rights of Toni F., the appeal is from so much of an order of disposition of the Family Court, Queens County (Gage, J.), dated May 25, 1995, as, after fact-finding and dispositional hearings, terminated her parental rights.

Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs and disbursements.

Upon reviewing the record, we find that termination of the mother’s parental rights was supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see, Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 NY2d 136, 147; Matter of Gerald M., 112 AD2d 6). The Family Court acted within its discretion by refusing to suspend judgment (see, Family Ct Act §§ 631, 633; see also, Matter of Michael B., 80 NY2d 299). O’Brien, J. P., Copertino, Pizzuto and Hart, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

232 A.D.2d 413, 648 N.Y.S.2d 329, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9889, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-booker-tony-f-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack