In re John M.

89 A.D.2d 822, 453 N.Y.S.2d 523, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17960
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in In re John M.. Read the opinion of the Court — 71 A.D.2d 144

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

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).

89 A.D.2d 822 (In re John M.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Santosky v. Kramer
455 U.S. 745 (Supreme Court, 1982)
In re Ulysses T.
87 A.D.2d 998 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)