In re Ruschina M.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Ruschina M.

246 A.D.2d 485, 667 N.Y.S.2d 744, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 708

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

DecidedJanuary 29, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 246 A.D.2d 485 (In re Ruschina 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 Ruschina M., 246 A.D.2d 485, 667 N.Y.S.2d 744, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 708 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Marjory Fields, J.), entered on or about March 9, 1995, insofar as appealed from, [486]*486terminating respondent’s parental rights to the subject child upon a finding of permanent neglect, and committing her custody and guardianship to petitioner agency and the Commissioner of Social Services for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner established by clear and convincing evidence that respondent failed to maintain contact with the child, or to plan for her future by taking steps to demonstrate that he has changed his violent assaultive behavior that had led to the child’s removal (see, Matter of Charles Frederick Eugene M., 171 AD2d 343, 347-348, appeal dismissed 79 NY2d 977; see also, Matter of Sonia H., 177 AD2d 575, 576, citing, inter alia, Matter of Ronald YY., 101 AD2d 895) and providing a feasible alternative resource during his extended incarceration (see, Matter of Charles Frederick Eugene M., supra). There is no merit to respondent’s claim that petitioner failed to make diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the family relationship (see, supra). Family Court also properly found that adoption by her foster mother is in the child’s best interests. Concur—Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Marjory Fields, J.), entered on or about March 9, 1995, insofar as appealed from, [486]*486terminating respondent’s parental rights to the subject child upon a finding of permanent neglect, and committing her custody and guardianship to petitioner agency and the Commissioner of Social Services for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner established by clear and convincing evidence that respondent failed to maintain contact with the child, or to plan for her future by taking steps to demonstrate that he has changed his violent assaultive behavior that had led to the child’s removal (see, Matter of Charles Frederick Eugene M., 171 AD2d 343, 347-348, appeal dismissed 79 NY2d 977; see also, Matter of Sonia H., 177 AD2d 575, 576, citing, inter alia, Matter of Ronald YY., 101 AD2d 895) and providing a feasible alternative resource during his extended incarceration (see, Matter of Charles Frederick Eugene M., supra). There is no merit to respondent’s claim that petitioner failed to make diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the family relationship (see, supra). Family Court also properly found that adoption by her foster mother is in the child’s best interests. Concur—Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

246 A.D.2d 485, 667 N.Y.S.2d 744, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 708, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-ruschina-m-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack