In re Jervel J.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Jervel J.

271 A.D.2d 533, 706 N.Y.S.2d 914, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3992

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

DecidedApril 10, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 271 A.D.2d 533 (In re Jervel J.) 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 Jervel J., 271 A.D.2d 533, 706 N.Y.S.2d 914, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3992 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a child protective proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Richmond County (McElrath, J.), dated February 5, 1998, which, after a hearing, granted the petition to extend the foster care placement of the subject child for a period of 12 months effective March 22, 1998.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

The period of placement provided for in the order appealed from has expired by its own terms, and the order has been superseded by a subsequent placement order which is beyond [534]*534the scope of review on this appeal. Any corrective measure which this Court might have taken with regard to the order appealed from would have no practical effect, and thus, the appeal is academic (see, Matter of Julia M., 255 AD2d 326). Bracken, J. P., O’Brien, Sullivan and Luciano, JJ., concur.

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

—In a child protective proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Richmond County (McElrath, J.), dated February 5, 1998, which, after a hearing, granted the petition to extend the foster care placement of the subject child for a period of 12 months effective March 22, 1998.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

The period of placement provided for in the order appealed from has expired by its own terms, and the order has been superseded by a subsequent placement order which is beyond [534]*534the scope of review on this appeal. Any corrective measure which this Court might have taken with regard to the order appealed from would have no practical effect, and thus, the appeal is academic (see, Matter of Julia M., 255 AD2d 326). Bracken, J. P., O’Brien, Sullivan and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

271 A.D.2d 533, 706 N.Y.S.2d 914, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3992, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-jervel-j-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack