Matter of Landyn H. (Matthew H.)

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Landyn H. (Matthew H.)

2017 NY Slip Op 7367, 154 A.D.3d 1133, 61 N.Y.S.3d 922

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

DecidedOctober 19, 2017

Docket523888

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 7367 (Matter of Landyn H. (Matthew H.)) 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 Landyn H. (Matthew H.), 2017 NY Slip Op 7367, 154 A.D.3d 1133, 61 N.Y.S.3d 922 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Rose, J.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Cortland County (Ames, J.), entered May 3, 2016, which, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Ct Act article 10, temporarily removed the subject child from respondent’s custody.

Petitioner commenced this neglect proceeding in March 2016 to remove the child (born in 2015) from respondent’s care based upon allegations that respondent was an active drug user. That same day, Family Court temporarily removed the child from respondent’s care and placed the child with his maternal aunt and uncle pending a hearing. After a fact-finding hearing pursuant to Family Ct Act § 1027, Family Court continued the child’s temporary removal and placement. The attorney for the child now appeals.

During the pendency of this appeal, Family Court issued an order of fact-finding and disposition that included a finding of neglect against respondent, returned the child to respondent’s care and suspended judgment subject to various terms and conditions. In light of this subsequent order, the appeal from the temporary order is moot (see Matter of Jadalynn HH. [Roy HH.], 135 AD3d 1089, 1089 [2016]; Matter of Mary YY. [Albert YY.], 98 AD3d 1198, 1198 [2012]), and we find that the exception to the mootness doctrine does not apply (see Matter of Michael A. [Patricia A.], 79 AD3d 1230, 1231 [2010]).

Peters, P.J., Garry, Aarons and Rumsey, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

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

Rose, J.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Cortland County (Ames, J.), entered May 3, 2016, which, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Ct Act article 10, temporarily removed the subject child from respondent’s custody.

Petitioner commenced this neglect proceeding in March 2016 to remove the child (born in 2015) from respondent’s care based upon allegations that respondent was an active drug user. That same day, Family Court temporarily removed the child from respondent’s care and placed the child with his maternal aunt and uncle pending a hearing. After a fact-finding hearing pursuant to Family Ct Act § 1027, Family Court continued the child’s temporary removal and placement. The attorney for the child now appeals.

During the pendency of this appeal, Family Court issued an order of fact-finding and disposition that included a finding of neglect against respondent, returned the child to respondent’s care and suspended judgment subject to various terms and conditions. In light of this subsequent order, the appeal from the temporary order is moot (see Matter of Jadalynn HH. [Roy HH.], 135 AD3d 1089, 1089 [2016]; Matter of Mary YY. [Albert YY.], 98 AD3d 1198, 1198 [2012]), and we find that the exception to the mootness doctrine does not apply (see Matter of Michael A. [Patricia A.], 79 AD3d 1230, 1231 [2010]).

Peters, P.J., Garry, Aarons and Rumsey, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2017 NY Slip Op 7367, 154 A.D.3d 1133, 61 N.Y.S.3d 922, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-landyn-h-matthew-h-nyappdiv-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack