Matter of Jose C. v. Johnny C.

2017 NY Slip Op 8490, 156 A.D.3d 430, 64 N.Y.S.3d 515, 2017 WL 6001655
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 5, 2017
Docket5142
StatusPublished

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 8490 (Matter of Jose C. v. Johnny 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
Matter of Jose C. v. Johnny C., 2017 NY Slip Op 8490, 156 A.D.3d 430, 64 N.Y.S.3d 515, 2017 WL 6001655 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Opinion

Order, Family Court, New York County (J. Machelle Sweet-ing, J.), entered on or about November 21, 2016, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, dismissed petitioner grandparents’ petition for custody of the subject child, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Family Court properly dismissed summarily the paternal grandparents’ petition for custody of the subject child, since the petition contained only conclusory statements that failed to allege extraordinary circumstances warranting a hearing (see Matter of Maddox v Maddox, 141 AD3d 529 [2d Dept 2016], lv denied 28 NY3d 905 [2016]). There was no basis for the child to be placed in the custody of the grandparents without a showing of extraordinary circumstances, where the child was in the custody of an otherwise fit parent (see id.).

Although the grandparents asserted that they cared for the child for seven years after his birth, there was no proof of a prolonged separation between the mother and child or intent by the mother to relinquish her parental duties and care of the child to the grandparents (compare Matter of Suarez v Williams, 26 NY3d 440 [2015] [grandparents may demonstrate standing where the child has lived with the grandparents for a prolonged period of time]). Nor was there an allegation that rose to the level of surrender, abandonment, unfitness, or persistent neglect sufficient to warrant a hearing (see id. at 446; see also Matter of Bennett v Jeffreys, 40 NY2d 543 [1976]).

Concur—Richter, J.R, Manzanet-Daniels, Andrias, Kern and Singh, JJ.

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

Related

The Matter of Ricardo Suarez v. Melissa Williams
44 N.E.3d 915 (New York Court of Appeals, 2015)
Matter of Maddox v. Maddox
141 A.D.3d 529 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Bennett v. Jeffreys
356 N.E.2d 277 (New York Court of Appeals, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2017 NY Slip Op 8490, 156 A.D.3d 430, 64 N.Y.S.3d 515, 2017 WL 6001655, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-jose-c-v-johnny-c-nyappdiv-2017.