In re Lucille R.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Lucille R.

71 A.D.2d 592, 418 N.Y.S.2d 423, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12785

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

DecidedJuly 10, 1979

StatusPublished

This text of 71 A.D.2d 592 (In re Lucille R.) 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 Lucille R., 71 A.D.2d 592, 418 N.Y.S.2d 423, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12785 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

Family Court, New York County, entered February 6, 1978, dismissing the petition, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the petition reinstated and granted to the extent of finding the infant to be a permanently neglected child, and the [593]*593matter remanded for a dispositional hearing. This petition was brought by the New York Foundling Hospital to free for adoption, pursuant to section 384-b of the Social Services Law and article 6 of the Family Court Act, a child who had been in foster care since 1969. After hearing from three witnesses, whose testimony encompassed almost 200 pages of transcript, the court reserved decision for two months and then dismissed the petition without opinion. The issue was whether the child is permanently neglected within the statutory definition. The record clearly demonstrates that for a period of more than one year following the child’s placement, respondent failed to make contact with the child, or plan for her future, notwithstanding the diligent efforts of the agency. Thus, the requirements of the statute were met (see Social Services Law, § 384-b, subd 7, pars [a], [b], [c]) and the fact-finding court should have so found. In conclusion we note that the disposition here, "Petition dismissed” was hardly calculated to enlighten counsel or any appellate tribunal as to the respects in which the proof failed. Specific findings should have been made. (See Matter of Harris v Doley, 22 AD2d 769; CPLR 4213, subd [b]; Family Ct Act, § 165.) Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Bloom, Lupiano, Silverman and Ross, JJ.

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

Family Court, New York County, entered February 6, 1978, dismissing the petition, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the petition reinstated and granted to the extent of finding the infant to be a permanently neglected child, and the [593]*593matter remanded for a dispositional hearing. This petition was brought by the New York Foundling Hospital to free for adoption, pursuant to section 384-b of the Social Services Law and article 6 of the Family Court Act, a child who had been in foster care since 1969. After hearing from three witnesses, whose testimony encompassed almost 200 pages of transcript, the court reserved decision for two months and then dismissed the petition without opinion. The issue was whether the child is permanently neglected within the statutory definition. The record clearly demonstrates that for a period of more than one year following the child’s placement, respondent failed to make contact with the child, or plan for her future, notwithstanding the diligent efforts of the agency. Thus, the requirements of the statute were met (see Social Services Law, § 384-b, subd 7, pars [a], [b], [c]) and the fact-finding court should have so found. In conclusion we note that the disposition here, "Petition dismissed” was hardly calculated to enlighten counsel or any appellate tribunal as to the respects in which the proof failed. Specific findings should have been made. (See Matter of Harris v Doley, 22 AD2d 769; CPLR 4213, subd [b]; Family Ct Act, § 165.) Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Bloom, Lupiano, Silverman and Ross, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

71 A.D.2d 592, 418 N.Y.S.2d 423, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12785, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-lucille-r-nyappdiv-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack