In re Jonathan S.

79 A.D.3d 539, 912 N.Y.S.2d 215
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 14, 2010
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 79 A.D.3d 539 (In re Jonathan 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 Jonathan S., 79 A.D.3d 539, 912 N.Y.S.2d 215 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

Opinion

Order, Family Court, New York County (Jody Adams, J.), entered on or about July 23, 2009, which, insofar as appealed from, upon a fact-finding determination that respondent mother neglected the subject children, placed the children in the custody of the Administration for Children’s Services until the completion of the next permanency hearing, unanimously affirmed insofar as it brings up for review the fact-finding determination, and the appeal otherwise dismissed, without costs, as moot.

The appeal from the dispositional order has been rendered moot as the date scheduled for the next permanency hearing has passed (see Matter of Taisha R., 14 AD3d 410 [2005]).

The finding of neglect is supported by a preponderance of the evidence. The mother’s hospital records demonstrate that she was diagnosed with a major depressive disorder, which was recurrent and moderate to severe, and she had expressed to hospital personnel that she was experiencing increasingly persistent thoughts of killing herself and drowning the children in the bathtub. There were also numerous incidents of domestic violence in the presence of the children. Under these circumstances, the court properly found that the children’s “physical, mental or emotional condition . . . [was] in imminent danger of becoming impaired” (Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i]; see Matter of Kayla W., 47 AD3d 571 [2008]). Contrary to the mother’s contention, expert testimony regarding how her mental illness affected her ability to care for the children was not required (see Matter of Jayvien E. [Marisol T.], 70 AD3d 430, 436 [2010]). Concur— Tom, J.P., Andrias, Saxe, Freedman and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

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

Related

Matter of Shawn S.
2018 NY Slip Op 4208 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Matter of Juelz U. (Chantal Nicole C.-D.)
2018 NY Slip Op 4107 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Matter of Jalicia G. (Jacqueline G.)
130 A.D.3d 402 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Matter of Kaiyeem C. (Ndaka C.)
126 A.D.3d 528 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
In re A.M.
44 Misc. 3d 514 (NYC Family Court, 2014)
In re Liarah H.
111 A.D.3d 514 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
In re Briana S.
91 A.D.3d 447 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
79 A.D.3d 539, 912 N.Y.S.2d 215, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-jonathan-s-nyappdiv-2010.