In re Damian D.T.B.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Damian D.T.B.

294 A.D.2d 359, 741 N.Y.S.2d 716

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

DecidedMay 6, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 294 A.D.2d 359 (In re Damian D.T.B.) 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 Damian D.T.B., 294 A.D.2d 359, 741 N.Y.S.2d 716 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—In two related proceedings pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b to terminate the mother’s parental rights on the ground of permanent neglect, the mother appeals from two orders of disposition of the Family Court, Dutchess County (Brands, J.), both dated September 5, 2000 (one as to [360]*360each child), which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court, dated August 2, 2000, made after a hearing, finding that she had neglected the children, Damian D.T.B. and Richard L.B., Jr., terminated her parental rights, and committed the children to the guardianship and custody of the Dutchess County Department of Social Services.

Ordered that the orders of disposition are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The evidence establishes that the mother “failed to plan for the future” of these two children, as required by Social Services Law § 384-b (7) (c). Notwithstanding the agency’s persistent and diligent efforts to help the mother by offering her parenting classes, therapy, evaluations, transportation, foster care payments, moving expenses, rent payments, and security, the mother refused to cooperate, and thus failed to plan for her children’s future and welfare. An agency that has embarked on a diligent course but faces an utterly uncooperative or indifferent parent has nevertheless fulfilled its duty (see Matter of Sheila G., 61 NY2d 368, 385). Prudenti, P.J., Feuerstein, Friedmann and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

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

—In two related proceedings pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b to terminate the mother’s parental rights on the ground of permanent neglect, the mother appeals from two orders of disposition of the Family Court, Dutchess County (Brands, J.), both dated September 5, 2000 (one as to [360]*360each child), which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court, dated August 2, 2000, made after a hearing, finding that she had neglected the children, Damian D.T.B. and Richard L.B., Jr., terminated her parental rights, and committed the children to the guardianship and custody of the Dutchess County Department of Social Services.

Ordered that the orders of disposition are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The evidence establishes that the mother “failed to plan for the future” of these two children, as required by Social Services Law § 384-b (7) (c). Notwithstanding the agency’s persistent and diligent efforts to help the mother by offering her parenting classes, therapy, evaluations, transportation, foster care payments, moving expenses, rent payments, and security, the mother refused to cooperate, and thus failed to plan for her children’s future and welfare. An agency that has embarked on a diligent course but faces an utterly uncooperative or indifferent parent has nevertheless fulfilled its duty (see Matter of Sheila G., 61 NY2d 368, 385). Prudenti, P.J., Feuerstein, Friedmann and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

294 A.D.2d 359, 741 N.Y.S.2d 716, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-damian-dtb-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack