Matter of Carolyn F.
2008 NY Slip Op 08125 [55 AD3d 832]
October 21, 2008
Appellate Division, Second Department
As corrected through Wednesday, December 10, 2008


In the Matter of Carolyn F. Orange County Department of SocialServices, Respondent; Calvin F., Appellant. (Proceeding No. 1.) In the Matter of Jeanette F. OrangeCounty Department of Social Services, Respondent; Calvin F., Appellant. (Proceeding No. 2.) In theMatter of Tamika F. Orange County Department of Social Services, Respondent; Calvin F., Appellant.(Proceeding No. 3.)

[*1]Joseph J. Artrip, New Windsor, N.Y., for appellant.

David L. Darwin, County Attorney, Goshen, N.Y. (Christine Foy Stage of counsel), forrespondent.

John A. Pappalardo, White Plains, N.Y., attorney for the children.

In related proceedings pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b to terminate parental rightson the ground of permanent neglect, the father appeals from an order of disposition of the FamilyCourt, Orange County (Kiedaisch, J.), dated August 3, 2007, which, after a fact-finding anddispositional hearing, determined that he failed to comply with the terms and conditions of a "Findings ofFact, Conclusions of Law & Order of Disposition, Suspended Judgment" of the same court datedMarch 7, 2007, terminated [*2]his parental rights, and transferredguardianship and custody of the subject children to the petitioner, Orange County Department of SocialServices, for the purpose of adoption.

Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The petitioner Orange County Department of Social Services showed, by a preponderance of theevidence, that the father had violated the terms and conditions of a "Findings of Fact, Conclusions ofLaw & Order of Disposition, Suspended Judgment" dated March 7, 2007 (see Matter of Michael Phillip T., 44 AD3d1062, 1063 [2007]). Contrary to the father's contention, the petitioner was not required to provethat it made diligent efforts to strengthen the parental relationship, because the father admitted, inter alia,that he permanently neglected the subject children and that caseworkers had exercised due diligence inworking with him (see Matter of AaronS., 15 AD3d 585, 586 [2005]; Matter of Fard Saleem G., 297 AD2d 677 [2002];Matter of Patricia O., 175 AD2d 870 [1991]). Furthermore, the Family Court properlyadmitted records concerning the father's substance abuse treatment (see CPLR 4518; Matter of Alyshia M.R., 53 AD3d1060 [2008]). Fisher, J.P., Covello, McCarthy and Leventhal, JJ., concur.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.