In re Mia M.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Mia M.

114 A.D.3d 793, 980 N.Y.S.2d 269

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

DecidedFebruary 13, 2014

StatusPublished

This text of 114 A.D.3d 793 (In re Mia M.) 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 Mia M., 114 A.D.3d 793, 980 N.Y.S.2d 269 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

In a child neglect proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the mother appeals from an order of fact-finding and disposition of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Freundlich, J.), dated November 27, 2012, which, after fact-finding and dispositional hearings, inter alia, found that she neglected the subject child and continued placement of the child in the custody of the petitioner.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

The appeal must be dismissed as academic in light of two orders of the Family Court, Suffolk County, both dated April 26, 2013, which vacated all orders and orders of protection entered with respect to this neglect proceeding and directed the withdrawal of the petition. Since the order which made a finding of neglect and continued placement of the subject child in the custody of the petitioner has been vacated, the mother’s appeal has been rendered academic (see Matter of Winona Pi. [Winona Pa.], 86 AD3d 542 [2011]). Balkin, J.E, Chambers, Lott and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur.

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

In a child neglect proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the mother appeals from an order of fact-finding and disposition of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Freundlich, J.), dated November 27, 2012, which, after fact-finding and dispositional hearings, inter alia, found that she neglected the subject child and continued placement of the child in the custody of the petitioner.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

The appeal must be dismissed as academic in light of two orders of the Family Court, Suffolk County, both dated April 26, 2013, which vacated all orders and orders of protection entered with respect to this neglect proceeding and directed the withdrawal of the petition. Since the order which made a finding of neglect and continued placement of the subject child in the custody of the petitioner has been vacated, the mother’s appeal has been rendered academic (see Matter of Winona Pi. [Winona Pa.], 86 AD3d 542 [2011]). Balkin, J.E, Chambers, Lott and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

114 A.D.3d 793, 980 N.Y.S.2d 269, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-mia-m-nyappdiv-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack