In re Lourdes O.

52 A.D.3d 203, 859 N.Y.S.2d 78
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 3, 2008
StatusPublished
Cited by18 cases

This text of 52 A.D.3d 203 (In re Lourdes O.) 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 Lourdes O., 52 A.D.3d 203, 859 N.Y.S.2d 78 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

Orders of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Sidney Gribetz, J.), entered on or about August 2, 2006, which, to the extent appealed from, terminated respondent father’s parental rights to the subject children upon a finding that he violated the terms of a suspended judgment, and committed custody and guardianship of the children to petitioner Commissioner of the Administration for Children’s Services for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The determination that respondent violated the conditions of the suspended judgment is supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see Matter of Shawna DD., 289 AD2d 892, 894 [2001]), including his failure to work diligently to obtain suitable housing for himself and his children, and to attend individual therapy and his children’s mental health appointments (see Matter of Aparicio Rodrigo B., 29 AD3d 351 [2006]). Lapses by the agency due to a transfer of the case from one agency to another did not relieve respondent of his responsibility to comply with the terms of the suspended judgment (see Matter of Jessica J., 44 AD3d 1132, 1133-1134 [2007]).

[204]*204The circumstances presented do not warrant an extension of the suspended judgment for an additional year where respondent failed to demonstrate the “exceptional circumstances” required to extend a suspended judgment (Family Ct Act § 633 [b]), and where the record establishes that further efforts to reunite the family would not be in the best interests of the children (see Matter of Rigoberto M., 18 AD3d 405 [2005]). Concur— Lippman, PJ., Mazzarelli, Williams, Sweeny and Acosta, JJ.

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

Related

Matter of M.A.F. (M.F.)
2025 NY Slip Op 05772 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2025)
Matter of Frederick T. (Maria T.)
2021 NY Slip Op 00817 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
Matter of Madisynn W. (Esprit L.)
2020 NY Slip Op 819 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Matter of Micah T. (Josette D.)
2019 NY Slip Op 2832 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Matter of Kaniya D. (Queleen D.)
2018 NY Slip Op 6207 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
In re Anthony Wayne S.
110 A.D.3d 464 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
In re Isaiah M.
109 A.D.3d 745 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
In re Wayne S.
106 A.D.3d 463 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
In re Steven A.
100 A.D.3d 559 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
A., LESTARIYAH, MTR. OF
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011
In re Lestariyah A.
89 A.D.3d 1420 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
In re Christian Anthony Y.T.
78 A.D.3d 410 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
In re Demario J.
61 A.D.3d 1437 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
In re Tayquan B.
55 A.D.3d 355 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
52 A.D.3d 203, 859 N.Y.S.2d 78, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-lourdes-o-nyappdiv-2008.