Home/New York Court of Appeals/Matter of Malik

Matter of Malik

356 N.E.2d 288, 40 N.Y.2d 840, 387 N.Y.S.2d 835, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 3012
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedSeptember 21, 1976
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 356 N.E.2d 288 (Matter of Malik) 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 Malik, 356 N.E.2d 288, 40 N.Y.2d 840, 387 N.Y.S.2d 835, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 3012 (N.Y. 1976).

Opinion

Memorandum. Order of the Appellate Division affirmed, without costs.

Matter of Anonymous (St. Christopher’s Home) (40 NY2d 96, 99, 102-103) is dispositive of one issue raised in this appeal: whether in statutory abandonment proceedings under section 384 of the Social Services Law the authorized agency charged with temporary foster care must exercise diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship. On the other issue, abandonment, the Family Court concluded that the evidentiary facts established abandonment, and the Appellate Division affirmed. All that remains for this court to decide is whether the finding of ultimate fact of abandonment is supported by sufficient evidence. The answer must be affirmative, even if one consider in favor of the mother the disadvantages and misfortunes under which she functioned and which undoubtedly contributed to the abandonment.

The effect of this disposition is to separate the child not only from his mother, but also from his three siblings, only one of whom is with the mother. This is, of course, quite unfortunate, but the record also establishes that, in the best interests of the child, the separation and eventual adoption is the better choice of what are tragic alternatives. The factual background and tensions are somewhat paralleled by those in Matter of Orlando F. (40 NY2d 103, 106-109), albeit that case involved a permanent neglect proceeding under section 611 of the Family Court Act, rather than an abandonment proceeding as here. (See, also, Matter of Ray A. M., 37 NY2d 619, another permanent neglect case.)

*842 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

H., BURKE, MTR. OF
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015
In re Burke H.
134 A.D.3d 1499 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
In re Annette B.
2 A.D.3d 721 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
In re S. Children
210 A.D.2d 175 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
In re Shaka Efion C.
207 A.D.2d 740 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
In re Christine F.
147 A.D.2d 980 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
In re Julius P.
472 N.E.2d 1003 (New York Court of Appeals, 1984)
In re Wesley L.
72 A.D.2d 137 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1980)
In re the Adoption of Dennis
94 Misc. 2d 422 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1978)
People ex rel. Wilder v. Director, Spence-Chapin Services to Families & Children
93 Misc. 2d 617 (New York Supreme Court, 1978)
In re Patricia A. W.
89 Misc. 2d 368 (NYC Family Court, 1977)
In re Yem
54 A.D.2d 673 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1976)
Bennett v. Jeffreys
356 N.E.2d 277 (New York Court of Appeals, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
356 N.E.2d 288, 40 N.Y.2d 840, 387 N.Y.S.2d 835, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 3012, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-malik-ny-1976.