In re Tyquena B.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Tyquena B.

142 A.D.2d 576, 530 N.Y.S.2d 237, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7419

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

DecidedJuly 5, 1988

StatusPublished

This text of 142 A.D.2d 576 (In re Tyquena 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 Tyquena B., 142 A.D.2d 576, 530 N.Y.S.2d 237, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7419 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a proceeding pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b to terminate the parental rights of the mother with respect to the infant herein [577]*577on the ground of permanent neglect, the mother appeals from a dispositional order of the Family Court, Kings County (Schecter, J.), dated August 6, 1987, which terminated her parental rights and committed the custody and guardianship of the child to the petitioners Angel Guardian Home and Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the mother’s contentions, the record before us amply supports the Family Court’s finding that Angel Guardian Home fulfilled its statutory obligation (see, Social Services Law § 384-b [7]) of employing diligent efforts to strengthen the parent-child relationship (see, e.g., Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 NY2d 136). Moreover, the agency sustained its burden of demonstrating, by clear and convincing evidence (see, Matter of Sheila G., 61 NY2d 368), that the mother permanently neglected the infant despite the agency’s repeated offers of assistance (see, Matter of Orlando F., 40 NY2d 103; Matter of Ann Marie D., 127 AD2d 764; Matter of Lisa L., 117 AD2d 931). Hence, we discern no basis for disturbing the dispositional order under review. Thompson, J. P., Spatt, Sullivan and Harwood, JJ., concur.

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

— In a proceeding pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b to terminate the parental rights of the mother with respect to the infant herein [577]*577on the ground of permanent neglect, the mother appeals from a dispositional order of the Family Court, Kings County (Schecter, J.), dated August 6, 1987, which terminated her parental rights and committed the custody and guardianship of the child to the petitioners Angel Guardian Home and Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the mother’s contentions, the record before us amply supports the Family Court’s finding that Angel Guardian Home fulfilled its statutory obligation (see, Social Services Law § 384-b [7]) of employing diligent efforts to strengthen the parent-child relationship (see, e.g., Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 NY2d 136). Moreover, the agency sustained its burden of demonstrating, by clear and convincing evidence (see, Matter of Sheila G., 61 NY2d 368), that the mother permanently neglected the infant despite the agency’s repeated offers of assistance (see, Matter of Orlando F., 40 NY2d 103; Matter of Ann Marie D., 127 AD2d 764; Matter of Lisa L., 117 AD2d 931). Hence, we discern no basis for disturbing the dispositional order under review. Thompson, J. P., Spatt, Sullivan and Harwood, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

142 A.D.2d 576, 530 N.Y.S.2d 237, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7419, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-tyquena-b-nyappdiv-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack