In re Foteos S.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Foteos S.

216 A.D.2d 955, 629 N.Y.S.2d 712, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7356

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

DecidedJune 9, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 216 A.D.2d 955 (In re Foteos S.) 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 Foteos S., 216 A.D.2d 955, 629 N.Y.S.2d 712, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7356 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: The determination of Family Court to extend respondent’s placement for an additional 12 months is supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see, Matter of Percy H., 159 AD2d 623). There is no merit to respondent’s procedural argument. The County Attorney, the appropriate presentment agency (see, Family Ct Act § 301.2 [12]; §§ 254, 254-a), was notified of the hearing and was provided with an opportunity to be heard (see, Family Ct Act § 355.3 [2]). (Appeal from Order of Monroe County Family Court, Bonadio, J.—Extend Placement.) Present—Denman, P. J., Pine, Callahan, Doerr and Balio, JJ.

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

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: The determination of Family Court to extend respondent’s placement for an additional 12 months is supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see, Matter of Percy H., 159 AD2d 623). There is no merit to respondent’s procedural argument. The County Attorney, the appropriate presentment agency (see, Family Ct Act § 301.2 [12]; §§ 254, 254-a), was notified of the hearing and was provided with an opportunity to be heard (see, Family Ct Act § 355.3 [2]). (Appeal from Order of Monroe County Family Court, Bonadio, J.—Extend Placement.) Present—Denman, P. J., Pine, Callahan, Doerr and Balio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

216 A.D.2d 955, 629 N.Y.S.2d 712, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7356, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-foteos-s-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack