Home/New York Court of Appeals/MATTER OF BENITEZ v. Llano

MATTER OF BENITEZ v. Llano

349 N.E.2d 876, 39 N.Y.2d 758, 384 N.Y.S.2d 775, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 2701
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedApril 27, 1976
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 349 N.E.2d 876 (MATTER OF BENITEZ v. Llano) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
MATTER OF BENITEZ v. Llano, 349 N.E.2d 876, 39 N.Y.2d 758, 384 N.Y.S.2d 775, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 2701 (N.Y. 1976).

Opinion

Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs.

Due to the concurrence of circumstances described in the opinion at the Family Court and the delays, for whatever reasons, in prosecuting this custody proceeding, the infant is within months of attaining his legal maturity, and, therefore, the legal right to choose where and with whom he will live. It *759 would be bootless and cruel to change his custody at this time. Under the circumstances the principles applicable to children of more tender years may not be blindly applied (cf. Matter of Spence-Chapin Adoption Serv. v Polk, 29 NY2d 196; People ex rel. Kropp v Shepsky, 305 NY 465). The effects of the extended separation of the mother from her child these many years and his consequent attachment to his relatives who had served as foster parents are irreversible, however differently one would have wished the events to have occurred. The natural parent cannot achieve attachment to and affection from the child by legal compulsion at this late date. The law being incapable to accomplish the result by compulsion, she must seek, and ought soon to have better opportunity to achieve the result by means free of compulsion and confrontation, the common and preferred basis upon which human relations are built.

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur in memorandum.

Order affirmed.

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

Related

In re Alexander N.
5 A.D.3d 776 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Chase v. Reome
289 A.D.2d 894 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Ratliff v. Glanda
263 A.D.2d 816 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Janet S. M. M. v. Commissioner of Social Services
158 Misc. 2d 851 (NYC Family Court, 1993)
Curry v. Ashby
129 A.D.2d 310 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1987)
Milli v. Morreale
83 A.D.2d 173 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1981)
In Re the Marriage of Allen
626 P.2d 16 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 1981)
In re Sanjivini K.
391 N.E.2d 1316 (New York Court of Appeals, 1979)
Guzzo v. Guzzo
66 A.D.2d 833 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1978)
In re Suzanne Y.
95 Misc. 2d 733 (NYC Family Court, 1978)
In re Gerald G. G.
61 A.D.2d 521 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1978)
Nehra v. Uhlar
372 N.E.2d 4 (New York Court of Appeals, 1977)
In re Patricia A. W.
89 Misc. 2d 368 (NYC Family Court, 1977)
Ruth "J" v. Beaudoin
55 A.D.2d 52 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1976)
In re the Guardianship of the Person & Custody of Amy S.
89 Misc. 2d 42 (NYC Family Court, 1976)
Bennett v. Jeffreys
356 N.E.2d 277 (New York Court of Appeals, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
349 N.E.2d 876, 39 N.Y.2d 758, 384 N.Y.S.2d 775, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 2701, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-benitez-v-llano-ny-1976.