Matter of Jimmy A.M. (James M.)

2017 NY Slip Op 979, 147 A.D.3d 843, 46 N.Y.S.3d 424
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 8, 2017
Docket2015-10869
StatusPublished

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 979 (Matter of Jimmy A.M. (James 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
Matter of Jimmy A.M. (James M.), 2017 NY Slip Op 979, 147 A.D.3d 843, 46 N.Y.S.3d 424 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Opinion

Appeal by the father from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Lillian Wan, J.), dated June 16, 2015. The order denied the father’s motion to vacate his default in appearing at the fact-finding hearing wherein the court determined that the father is entitled to notice of the subject child’s adoption proceedings, but that his consent to the adoption of the subject child is not required.

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

The appeal from the order denying the father’s motion to vacate his default must be dismissed as academic, as the subject child has attained the age of 18 (see Matter of Latisha T’Keyah J. [Monie J.], 117 AD3d 1051, 1052 [2014]; Matter of Shamika K.L.N. [Melvin S.L.], 101 AD3d 729, 730 [2012]; Matter of Teshana Tracey T. [Janet T.], 71 AD3d 1032, 1033 [2010]; see also Domestic Relations Law § 111 [4]). Moreover, even if *844 the father could establish that he was entitled to vacate his default, the Family Court’s finding that the father is entitled to notice of the subject child’s adoption proceedings, but that his consent to the adoption is not required, does not constitute “a permanent and significant stigma that might indirectly affect the father’s status in future proceedings” (Matter of Latisha T’Keyah J. [Monie J.], 117 AD3d at 1052; cf. Matter of Mia P.R.D. [David D.], 113 AD3d 679, 680 [2014]; Matter of Shamika K.L.N. [Melvin S.L.], 101 AD3d at 730).

Leventhal, J.P., Roman, Sgroi and Connolly, JJ., concur.

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

Related

In re Tracey T.
71 A.D.3d 1032 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2017 NY Slip Op 979, 147 A.D.3d 843, 46 N.Y.S.3d 424, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-jimmy-am-james-m-nyappdiv-2017.