In re Maurice Jamel G.

267 A.D.2d 173, 700 N.Y.S.2d 452, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13370
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 28, 1999
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 267 A.D.2d 173 (In re Maurice Jamel G.) 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 Maurice Jamel G., 267 A.D.2d 173, 700 N.Y.S.2d 452, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13370 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Opinion

—Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Stewart Weinstein, [174]*174J.), entered on or about August 26, 1997, which, to the extent appealed from, upon a finding of abandonment, terminated respondent father’s parental rights and committed custody and guardianship of the subject children to the Commissioner of Social Services and petitioner agency for purposes of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In light of clear and convincing evidence that respondent father, while incarcerated, inexcusably failed to communicate with the subject children or petitioner agency during the six-month period immediately prior to the filing of the instant petition, Family Court properly determined that respondent had abandoned his children within the meaning of Social Services Law § 384-b (5) (a) (see, Matter of Jasmine T., 162 AD2d 756, 757, lv denied 76 NY2d 714; see also, Matter of Ulysses T., 66 NY2d 773; Matter of Shaiane W., 254 AD2d 513; Matter of Lakeside Family & Children’s Servs. [Angel Takima C.], 242 AD2d 536). Attempts by the paternal aunt to visit with the children are not attributable to respondent for the purpose of negating the inference of abandonment (see, Matter of Crawford, 153 AD2d 108, 111). Finally, Family Court properly exercised its discretion in declining to hold a dispositional hearing prior to terminating respondent’s parental rights (see, Matter of Lakeside Family & Children’s Servs. [Angel Takima C.], 242 AD2d 536, supra; Matter of Juan Andres R., 216 AD2d 145). Concur — Tom, J. P., Wallach, Lerner, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

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

Related

Matter of Gina P. (Shannon O.)
2025 NY Slip Op 05726 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2025)
In re Cora Nicola H.
276 A.D.2d 298 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
In Re Emily B.
540 S.E.2d 542 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 2000)
In re Noelle Denise P.
271 A.D.2d 382 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
267 A.D.2d 173, 700 N.Y.S.2d 452, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13370, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-maurice-jamel-g-nyappdiv-1999.