Rodney W. v. Commissioner of Administration for Children's Services

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rodney W. v. Commissioner of Administration for Children's Services

6 A.D.3d 331, 775 N.Y.S.2d 515, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4897

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 27, 2004·Published

Opinion

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Clark V Richardson, J.), entered on or about September 4, 2001, which denied petitioner-appellant’s motion to vacate a prior order, same court and Justice, entered on or about August 21, 2001, which, upon petitioner-appellant’s default, dismissed his custody petitions [332]*332and adjudged that his consent was not necessary for the adoption of the subject children, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Family Court properly exercised its discretion in denying petitioner-appellant’s motion to vacate his default, since, inter alia, petitioner-appellant made no showing that his consent was necessary for the children’s adoption (see Matter of Derrick T., 261 AD2d 108 [1999]). Although given the opportunity, petitioner-appellant failed to make any demonstration that he had maintained substantial and continuous or repeated contact with the children (see Domestic Relations Law § 111 [1] [d]; Matter of James Q., 240 AD2d 841 [1997]). Concur—Nardelli, J.P., Saxe, Sullivan and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Clark V Richardson, J.), entered on or about September 4, 2001, which denied petitioner-appellant’s motion to vacate a prior order, same court and Justice, entered on or about August 21, 2001, which, upon petitioner-appellant’s default, dismissed his custody petitions [332]*332and adjudged that his consent was not necessary for the adoption of the subject children, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Family Court properly exercised its discretion in denying petitioner-appellant’s motion to vacate his default, since, inter alia, petitioner-appellant made no showing that his consent was necessary for the children’s adoption (see Matter of Derrick T., 261 AD2d 108 [1999]). Although given the opportunity, petitioner-appellant failed to make any demonstration that he had maintained substantial and continuous or repeated contact with the children (see Domestic Relations Law § 111 [1] [d]; Matter of James Q., 240 AD2d 841 [1997]). Concur—Nardelli, J.P., Saxe, Sullivan and Gonzalez, JJ.

Rodney W. v. Commissioner of Administration for Children's Services, 6 A.D.3d 331, 775 N.Y.S.2d 515, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4897 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

6 A.D.3d 331 (Rodney W. v. Commissioner of Administration for Children's Services) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related