E., JACOB, MTR. OF ( 2011 )


Menu:
  •            SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
    Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
    933
    CAF 10-00915
    PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., FAHEY, PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, AND SCONIERS, JJ.
    IN THE MATTER OF JACOB E.
    ---------------------------------------------
    STEUBEN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES,     MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
    PETITIONER-RESPONDENT;
    VALERIE E., RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.
    ROSEMARIE RICHARDS, SOUTH NEW BERLIN, FOR RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.
    JAMES B. DOYLE, III, BATH, FOR PETITIONER-RESPONDENT.
    DEETZA G. BENNO, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD, BATH, FOR JACOB E.
    Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Steuben County (Peter
    C. Bradstreet, J.), entered March 23, 2010 in a proceeding pursuant to
    Social Services Law § 384-b. The order, among other things,
    terminated respondent’s parental rights.
    It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is
    unanimously affirmed without costs.
    Memorandum: Respondent mother appeals from an order terminating
    her parental rights with respect to her son who is the subject of this
    proceeding on the ground of permanent neglect and transferring
    guardianship and custody to petitioner. We conclude that Family Court
    properly granted petitioner’s motion pursuant to Family Court Act §
    1039-b seeking to be relieved of the requirement that it make
    reasonable efforts to reunite the child with the mother. Petitioner
    established by the requisite clear and convincing evidence that the
    parental rights of the mother with respect to the son’s half sibling
    had been involuntarily terminated (see § 1039-b [b] [6]; Matter of
    Sasha M., 43 AD3d 1401, 1402, lv denied 10 NY3d 702), and that the
    mother had repeatedly failed to cooperate with programs intended to
    address her alcohol, substance abuse and mental health issues. In
    response, the mother failed to establish that requiring petitioner to
    make reasonable efforts to reunite her with her son “would be in the
    best interests of the child, not contrary to the health and safety of
    the child, and would likely result in the reunification of [the
    mother] and the child in the foreseeable future” (§ 1039-b [b]; see
    also Sasha M., 43 AD3d at 1402). We have reviewed the mother’s
    remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit.
    Entered:    September 30, 2011                  Patricia L. Morgan
    Clerk of the Court
    

Document Info

Docket Number: CAF 10-00915

Filed Date: 9/30/2011

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/8/2016