In re Eli G.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Eli G.

19 A.D.3d 169, 795 N.Y.S.2d 888, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6139

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

DecidedJune 9, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 19 A.D.3d 169 (In re Eli G.) 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 Eli G., 19 A.D.3d 169, 795 N.Y.S.2d 888, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6139 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Family Court, New York County (Sara E Schecter, J.), entered on or about November 7, 2003, which, after a fact-finding hearing, determined that respondent mother had permanently neglected her child, terminated her parental rights, and awarded custody and guardianship to petitioner agency for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The finding of permanent neglect was supported by clear and convincing evidence. Although petitioner diligently endeavored to help the mother address her substance abuse problems, provided all necessary referrals and attempted to help her complete the necessary steps for reunification with her son, she failed to complete the substance abuse program and otherwise failed to plan adequately for her child’s future (Matter of Dade Wynn F., 291 AD2d 218 [2002], lv denied 98 NY2d 604 [2002]). The court’s finding that termination of parental rights was in the child’s best interest was supported by a preponderance of the evidence (Matter of Dena Shamika A., 301 AD2d 464 [2003]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Saxe, Marlow and Sullivan, JJ.

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

Order, Family Court, New York County (Sara E Schecter, J.), entered on or about November 7, 2003, which, after a fact-finding hearing, determined that respondent mother had permanently neglected her child, terminated her parental rights, and awarded custody and guardianship to petitioner agency for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The finding of permanent neglect was supported by clear and convincing evidence. Although petitioner diligently endeavored to help the mother address her substance abuse problems, provided all necessary referrals and attempted to help her complete the necessary steps for reunification with her son, she failed to complete the substance abuse program and otherwise failed to plan adequately for her child’s future (Matter of Dade Wynn F., 291 AD2d 218 [2002], lv denied 98 NY2d 604 [2002]). The court’s finding that termination of parental rights was in the child’s best interest was supported by a preponderance of the evidence (Matter of Dena Shamika A., 301 AD2d 464 [2003]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Saxe, Marlow and Sullivan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 A.D.3d 169, 795 N.Y.S.2d 888, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6139, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-eli-g-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack