In re Faith D.A.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Faith D.A.

99 A.D.3d 641, 952 N.Y.2d 884

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

DecidedOctober 25, 2012

StatusPublished

This text of 99 A.D.3d 641 (In re Faith D.A.) 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 Faith D.A., 99 A.D.3d 641, 952 N.Y.2d 884 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

Petitioner met its burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that respondent is mentally ill within the meaning of Social Services Law § 384-b (4) (c) and (6) (a) (see Matter of Joyce T., 65 NY2d 39, 50 [1985]; Matter of Genesis S. [Irene Elizabeth S.], 70 AD3d 570 [1st Dept 2010]). The report and testimony from a psychologist who reviewed respondent’s medical records and conducted a clinical interview and found that respondent suffers from a personality disorder supports the determination that she is incapable of caring for the child presently and for the foreseeable future.

A separate dispositional hearing was not required since this is a case of termination for mental illness (see Matter of Joyce T., 65 NY2d at 47-50; Matter of Ashanti A., 56 AD3d 373, 373-374 [1st Dept 2008]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Andrias, Renwick, De-Grasse and Richter, JJ.

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

Petitioner met its burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that respondent is mentally ill within the meaning of Social Services Law § 384-b (4) (c) and (6) (a) (see Matter of Joyce T., 65 NY2d 39, 50 [1985]; Matter of Genesis S. [Irene Elizabeth S.], 70 AD3d 570 [1st Dept 2010]). The report and testimony from a psychologist who reviewed respondent’s medical records and conducted a clinical interview and found that respondent suffers from a personality disorder supports the determination that she is incapable of caring for the child presently and for the foreseeable future.

A separate dispositional hearing was not required since this is a case of termination for mental illness (see Matter of Joyce T., 65 NY2d at 47-50; Matter of Ashanti A., 56 AD3d 373, 373-374 [1st Dept 2008]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Andrias, Renwick, De-Grasse and Richter, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

99 A.D.3d 641, 952 N.Y.2d 884, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-faith-da-nyappdiv-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack