In re Margaret K.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Margaret K.

17 A.D.3d 466, 792 N.Y.S.2d 350, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3760

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 11, 2005·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law article 81 to appoint a guardian for the personal needs and property management of Margaret K., an alleged incapacitated person, Margaret K. appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Sgroi, J), dated March 8, 2004, which, after a hearing, inter alia, granted the petition and appointed a guardian for her personal needs and property management.

Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The petitioner established by clear and convincing evidence that the appellant, Margaret K., is likely to suffer harm because she is unable to provide for her personal needs and property management, or to adequately understand and appreciate the nature and consequences of such inability. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly appointed a guardian for the appellant’s personal needs and property management (see Mental Hygiene Law § 81.02; Matter of Marguerite W., 226 AD2d 786 [1996]; Matter of Harriet R., 224 AD2d 625 [1996]; Matter of Donald F.L., 210 AD2d 227 [1994]). Krausman, J.P., Mastro, Rivera and Skelos, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law article 81 to appoint a guardian for the personal needs and property management of Margaret K., an alleged incapacitated person, Margaret K. appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Sgroi, J), dated March 8, 2004, which, after a hearing, inter alia, granted the petition and appointed a guardian for her personal needs and property management.

Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The petitioner established by clear and convincing evidence that the appellant, Margaret K., is likely to suffer harm because she is unable to provide for her personal needs and property management, or to adequately understand and appreciate the nature and consequences of such inability. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly appointed a guardian for the appellant’s personal needs and property management (see Mental Hygiene Law § 81.02; Matter of Marguerite W., 226 AD2d 786 [1996]; Matter of Harriet R., 224 AD2d 625 [1996]; Matter of Donald F.L., 210 AD2d 227 [1994]). Krausman, J.P., Mastro, Rivera and Skelos, JJ., concur.

In re Margaret K., 17 A.D.3d 466, 792 N.Y.S.2d 350, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3760 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

17 A.D.3d 466 (In re Margaret K.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related