In re Casey J.

251 A.D.2d 1002, 674 N.Y.S.2d 239, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7017
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 10, 1998
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 251 A.D.2d 1002 (In re Casey J.) 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 Casey J., 251 A.D.2d 1002, 674 N.Y.S.2d 239, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7017 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Opinion

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Petitioner met its burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that respondent, by reason of mental illness, is presently and for the foreseeable future unable to provide proper and adequate care for his child (see, Social Services Law § 384-b [4] [c]; [6] [a]; Matter of Jarred R., 236 AD2d 888; Matter of Lonette Monique C., 236 AD2d 880; Matter of Johnine Rebecca C., 209 AD2d 1029; Matter of James J., 207 AD2d 960). The court-appointed psychiatrist testified that respondent has a history of drug and alcohol abuse and that he is suffering from paranoid schizophrenia. He testified that respondent had been hospitalized for mental illness on several occasions over the past 13 or 14 years and that there is little possibility of long-term improvement. The psychiatrist further testified that there is a strong possibility that respondent will resume using illegal drugs and stop taking his prescribed anti-psychotic medication and concluded that the child would be in danger of becoming neglected if placed in respondent’s custody. Respondent rested without submitting any evidence.

Family Court did not err in failing to appoint a guardian ad litem for respondent. There is no evidence tending to show that respondent, who was present at the fact-finding hearing with his attorney, was incapable of adequately defending his rights (see, Urban Pathways v Lublin, 227 AD2d 186; CPLR 1201). (Appeal from Order of Erie County Family Court, Townsend, J. — Terminate Parental Rights.) Present — Denman, P. J., Law-ton, Wisner, Balio and Boehm, JJ.

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

Related

M.R. v. D.R.
2024 NY Slip Op 50295(U) (New York Supreme Court, Westchester County, 2024)
Matter of Jesten J.F. (Ruth P.S.)
2018 NY Slip Op 8812 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
In re Barbara Anne B.
51 A.D.3d 1018 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
In re Justice T.
19 A.D.3d 1079 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
In re Michael D.
306 A.D.2d 938 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Brown v. Rochester General Hospital
292 A.D.2d 855 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Bowen v. Rubin
213 F. Supp. 2d 220 (E.D. New York, 2001)
In re Dylan K.
269 A.D.2d 826 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
251 A.D.2d 1002, 674 N.Y.S.2d 239, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7017, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-casey-j-nyappdiv-1998.