In re Eric Rafael M.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Eric Rafael M.

283 A.D.2d 178, 724 N.Y.S.2d 592, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4287

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

DecidedMay 1, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 283 A.D.2d 178 (In re Eric Rafael M.) 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 Eric Rafael M., 283 A.D.2d 178, 724 N.Y.S.2d 592, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4287 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Rhoda Cohen, J.), entered on or about November 10, 1999, terminating respondent’s parental rights to the subject child and committing the child’s guardianship and custody to petitioner agency and the Commissioner of Social Services for the purposes of adoption, upon a fact-finding determination of abandonment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Respondent, who was incarcerated throughout the six-month abandonment period (Social Services Law § 384-b [4] [b]; [5] [a]), admits no personal contact with the child or agency during that period, urging instead vicarious contact through his wife. Such contact, even if it had occurred during the abandonment period, and there is no showing that it did, does not serve to avoid a finding of abandonment (see, Matter of Keani D., 265 AD2d 261). Nor does respondent’s incarceration excuse his failure to make contact (see, id.). It is in the child’s best interests to be adopted by his foster family. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Tom, Wallach and Saxe, JJ.

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

—Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Rhoda Cohen, J.), entered on or about November 10, 1999, terminating respondent’s parental rights to the subject child and committing the child’s guardianship and custody to petitioner agency and the Commissioner of Social Services for the purposes of adoption, upon a fact-finding determination of abandonment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Respondent, who was incarcerated throughout the six-month abandonment period (Social Services Law § 384-b [4] [b]; [5] [a]), admits no personal contact with the child or agency during that period, urging instead vicarious contact through his wife. Such contact, even if it had occurred during the abandonment period, and there is no showing that it did, does not serve to avoid a finding of abandonment (see, Matter of Keani D., 265 AD2d 261). Nor does respondent’s incarceration excuse his failure to make contact (see, id.). It is in the child’s best interests to be adopted by his foster family. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Tom, Wallach and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

283 A.D.2d 178, 724 N.Y.S.2d 592, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4287, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-eric-rafael-m-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack