In re Prisca B.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Prisca B.

187 A.D.2d 313, 590 N.Y.S.2d 696, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12809

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

DecidedNovember 10, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 187 A.D.2d 313 (In re Prisca B.) 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 Prisca B., 187 A.D.2d 313, 590 N.Y.S.2d 696, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12809 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Family Court, New York County (Michael Gage, J.), entered September 17, 1991, returning custody of the subject children to respondent-appellant under petitioner-respondent’s supervision for a period of six months, following a fact-finding determination that the children were neglected, is unanimously affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

A finding of neglect with the consent of the guardian ad litem was made while respondent mother was involuntarily committed to a psychiatric unit, after a police officer removed her and her three children from a building lobby in February. One of the children, aged three, had no coat, and another child, aged two, had no shoes.

[314]*314Whatever deficiency there may have been in the appointment of the guardian, and we do not find that there was, is of no moment since the evidence elicited at the fact-finding hearing and the renewed motion to vacate demonstrated that there was no meritorious defense to the charge of neglect (Matter of Celeste M., 180 AD2d 437). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Rosenberger, Ross 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 (Michael Gage, J.), entered September 17, 1991, returning custody of the subject children to respondent-appellant under petitioner-respondent’s supervision for a period of six months, following a fact-finding determination that the children were neglected, is unanimously affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

A finding of neglect with the consent of the guardian ad litem was made while respondent mother was involuntarily committed to a psychiatric unit, after a police officer removed her and her three children from a building lobby in February. One of the children, aged three, had no coat, and another child, aged two, had no shoes.

[314]*314Whatever deficiency there may have been in the appointment of the guardian, and we do not find that there was, is of no moment since the evidence elicited at the fact-finding hearing and the renewed motion to vacate demonstrated that there was no meritorious defense to the charge of neglect (Matter of Celeste M., 180 AD2d 437). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Rosenberger, Ross and Asch, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

187 A.D.2d 313, 590 N.Y.S.2d 696, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12809, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-prisca-b-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack