In re Osuany G.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Osuany G.

186 A.D.2d 476

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

DecidedOctober 22, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 186 A.D.2d 476 (In re Osuany 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 Osuany G., 186 A.D.2d 476 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Family Court, New York County (Leah Marks, J.), entered May 9, 1991, which after a fact finding and dispositional hearing, inter alia, terminated respondent-appellant natural father’s parental rights on the grounds of permanent neglect pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b (7) (a), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Having arranged regular visits between the incarcerated respondent and his child, repeatedly reminding respondent of the need to find a resource for the care of his child, and by attempting, with inadequate assistance from respondent, to identify such a suitable resource, the petitioning agency clearly fulfilled its obligation to use "diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship” between respondent and his son (Social Services Law § 384-b [7] [a]; see, Matter of Gregory B., 74 NY2d 77).

While we would favor a post-adoption relationship between the child and respondent in the instant circumstances, the Court of Appeals has stated that this alternative is not presently authorized. (Supra.) Concur — Carro, J. P., Milonas, Ellerin and Asch, JJ.

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

Order, Family Court, New York County (Leah Marks, J.), entered May 9, 1991, which after a fact finding and dispositional hearing, inter alia, terminated respondent-appellant natural father’s parental rights on the grounds of permanent neglect pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b (7) (a), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Having arranged regular visits between the incarcerated respondent and his child, repeatedly reminding respondent of the need to find a resource for the care of his child, and by attempting, with inadequate assistance from respondent, to identify such a suitable resource, the petitioning agency clearly fulfilled its obligation to use "diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship” between respondent and his son (Social Services Law § 384-b [7] [a]; see, Matter of Gregory B., 74 NY2d 77).

While we would favor a post-adoption relationship between the child and respondent in the instant circumstances, the Court of Appeals has stated that this alternative is not presently authorized. (Supra.) Concur — Carro, J. P., Milonas, Ellerin and Asch, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 A.D.2d 476, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-osuany-g-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack