In re Tara C.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Tara C.

106 A.D.3d 735, 963 N.Y.S.2d 875

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

DecidedMay 1, 2013

StatusPublished

This text of 106 A.D.3d 735 (In re Tara C.) 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 Tara C., 106 A.D.3d 735, 963 N.Y.S.2d 875 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a neglect proceeding pursuant to Family 10, mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Queens County (Ramseur, R.), dated September 23, 2011, which, after a permanency hearing, continued the subject child’s placement in foster care.

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

The mother’s appeal from the order dated September 23, 2011, which, among other things, continued placement of the subject child in foster care, has been superseded by orders dated March 20, 2012, and September 18, 2012, respectively, from which no appeals have been taken. Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed as academic (see Matter of Anthony C. [Juan C.], 99 AD3d 798, 799 [2012]; Matter of Anthony B.-A. [Chandra B.], 88 AD3d 702 [2011]; Matter of Joseph A. [Fausat O.], 78 AD3d 826 [2010]). The appeal also must be dismissed as academic since the period of placement has expired (see Matter of Nazier B. [Anita B.], 96 AD3d 1049, 1050 [2012]; Matter of Emanuel Q. [Luis M.], 73 AD3d 1181 [2010]).

The mother’s remaining contentions concerning the order of disposition are not properly before this Court, since she did not appeal from that order (see CPLR 5515; Matter of Idhailia P. [Philip S.P.], 95 AD3d 1333, 1335 [2012]; Matter of Jamaica M. [Hakeem N.], 90 AD3d 1105, 1106-1107 [2011]; Matter of Jahmeiah S.-W, 21 AD3d 564, 565 [2005]). Skelos, J.P., Angiolillo, Chambers and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur.

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

—In a neglect proceeding pursuant to Family 10, mother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Queens County (Ramseur, R.), dated September 23, 2011, which, after a permanency hearing, continued the subject child’s placement in foster care.

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

The mother’s appeal from the order dated September 23, 2011, which, among other things, continued placement of the subject child in foster care, has been superseded by orders dated March 20, 2012, and September 18, 2012, respectively, from which no appeals have been taken. Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed as academic (see Matter of Anthony C. [Juan C.], 99 AD3d 798, 799 [2012]; Matter of Anthony B.-A. [Chandra B.], 88 AD3d 702 [2011]; Matter of Joseph A. [Fausat O.], 78 AD3d 826 [2010]). The appeal also must be dismissed as academic since the period of placement has expired (see Matter of Nazier B. [Anita B.], 96 AD3d 1049, 1050 [2012]; Matter of Emanuel Q. [Luis M.], 73 AD3d 1181 [2010]).

The mother’s remaining contentions concerning the order of disposition are not properly before this Court, since she did not appeal from that order (see CPLR 5515; Matter of Idhailia P. [Philip S.P.], 95 AD3d 1333, 1335 [2012]; Matter of Jamaica M. [Hakeem N.], 90 AD3d 1105, 1106-1107 [2011]; Matter of Jahmeiah S.-W, 21 AD3d 564, 565 [2005]). Skelos, J.P., Angiolillo, Chambers and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

106 A.D.3d 735, 963 N.Y.S.2d 875, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-tara-c-nyappdiv-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack