In re Jaxsin L.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Jaxsin L.

124 A.D.3d 1398, 2 N.Y.S.3d 307

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 2, 2015·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Onondaga County (Michael L. Hanuszczak, J.), entered November 4, 2013 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10. The order, [1399]*1399insofar as appealed from, denied respondent visitation with the subject child.

It is hereby ordered that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs.

Memorandum: As limited by her brief, respondent mother appeals from an order that denied her visitation with the subject child. Inasmuch as a subsequent order has been entered terminating the mother’s parental rights, we dismiss this appeal as moot (see Matter of Lateesha J., 252 AD2d 503, 503-504 [1998]; see also Matter of Alexander M. [Michael M.], 83 AD3d 1400, 1401 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 704 [2011]). We conclude that the exception to the mootness doctrine does not apply herein (see Matter of Francis S. [Wendy H.], 67 AD3d 1442, 1442 [2009], lv denied 14 NY3d 702 [2010]).

Present — Scudder, P.J., Centra, Carni and Sconiers, JJ.

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

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Onondaga County (Michael L. Hanuszczak, J.), entered November 4, 2013 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10. The order, [1399]*1399insofar as appealed from, denied respondent visitation with the subject child.

It is hereby ordered that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs.

Memorandum: As limited by her brief, respondent mother appeals from an order that denied her visitation with the subject child. Inasmuch as a subsequent order has been entered terminating the mother’s parental rights, we dismiss this appeal as moot (see Matter of Lateesha J., 252 AD2d 503, 503-504 [1998]; see also Matter of Alexander M. [Michael M.], 83 AD3d 1400, 1401 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 704 [2011]). We conclude that the exception to the mootness doctrine does not apply herein (see Matter of Francis S. [Wendy H.], 67 AD3d 1442, 1442 [2009], lv denied 14 NY3d 702 [2010]).

Present — Scudder, P.J., Centra, Carni and Sconiers, JJ.

In re Jaxsin L., 124 A.D.3d 1398, 2 N.Y.S.3d 307 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

124 A.D.3d 1398 (In re Jaxsin L.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related