In re John M.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re John M.

89 A.D.2d 822, 453 N.Y.S.2d 523, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17960

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

DecidedJuly 9, 1982

StatusPublished

This text of 89 A.D.2d 822 (In re John 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 John M., 89 A.D.2d 822, 453 N.Y.S.2d 523, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17960 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: Following a hearing respondent’s parental rights were terminated pursuant to subdivision 5 of section 384-b of the Social Services Law. In view of her own admission that she has not visited with nor contacted her son in several years, there was “clear and convincing” proof of abandonment (Santosky v Kramer, 455 US 745). We find no merit to respondent’s constitutional claims; abandonment and neglect apply to two different situations, thus justifying different treatment (see Matter of Ulysses T., 87 AD2d 998). (Appeal from order of Onondaga County Family Court, Sardino, J. — abandoned child). Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Doerr, Denman, Boomer and Schnepp, JJ.

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

Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: Following a hearing respondent’s parental rights were terminated pursuant to subdivision 5 of section 384-b of the Social Services Law. In view of her own admission that she has not visited with nor contacted her son in several years, there was “clear and convincing” proof of abandonment (Santosky v Kramer, 455 US 745). We find no merit to respondent’s constitutional claims; abandonment and neglect apply to two different situations, thus justifying different treatment (see Matter of Ulysses T., 87 AD2d 998). (Appeal from order of Onondaga County Family Court, Sardino, J. — abandoned child). Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Doerr, Denman, Boomer and Schnepp, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

89 A.D.2d 822, 453 N.Y.S.2d 523, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17960, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-john-m-nyappdiv-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack