Simpson v. Abare

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Simpson v. Abare

216 A.D.2d 633, 627 N.Y.S.2d 824, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6168

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 8, 1995·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Clinton County (McGill, J.), entered December 30, 1993, which, inter alia, granted petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, for custody of Michael Abare.

Respondent challenges Family Court’s award of custody of her minor son, Michael, to petitioner, Michael’s maternal aunt, who has cared for Michael since he was 12 months old. Initially, we reject respondent’s claim that the award of custody was not supported by a showing of "extraordinary circumstances”. There is uncontroverted evidence in the record that respondent, among other things, failed to provide Michael with proper nourishment, resulting in him being dangerously underweight, or to administer medications needed to treat his asthmatic condition. His health improved dramatically once placed with petitioner. Accordingly, we find that "extraordinary circumstances” warranted granting petitioner custody of Michael. We further find that Family Court’s findings of fact are adequately supported by testimony in the record.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Mercure, Casey and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs.

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

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Clinton County (McGill, J.), entered December 30, 1993, which, inter alia, granted petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, for custody of Michael Abare.

Respondent challenges Family Court’s award of custody of her minor son, Michael, to petitioner, Michael’s maternal aunt, who has cared for Michael since he was 12 months old. Initially, we reject respondent’s claim that the award of custody was not supported by a showing of "extraordinary circumstances”. There is uncontroverted evidence in the record that respondent, among other things, failed to provide Michael with proper nourishment, resulting in him being dangerously underweight, or to administer medications needed to treat his asthmatic condition. His health improved dramatically once placed with petitioner. Accordingly, we find that "extraordinary circumstances” warranted granting petitioner custody of Michael. We further find that Family Court’s findings of fact are adequately supported by testimony in the record.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Mercure, Casey and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs.

Simpson v. Abare, 216 A.D.2d 633, 627 N.Y.S.2d 824, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6168 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

216 A.D.2d 633 (Simpson v. Abare) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related