| Matter of Donovan W. |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 09222 [56 AD3d 1279] |
| November 21, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth Department |
| In the Matter of Donovan W., an Infant. Erie County Department ofSocial Services, Respondent; Lynn W., Appellant. |
—[*1] Joseph T. Jarzembek, Buffalo, for petitioner-respondent. David C. Schopp, Law Guardian, the Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo, Inc., Buffalo (Charles D.Halvorsen of counsel), for Donovan W.
Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Erie County (Margaret O. Szczur, J.), enteredSeptember 20, 2007 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: On appeal from an order of disposition that, inter alia, terminated her parentalrights with respect to her child and freed him for adoption, respondent mother contends thatFamily Court abused its discretion in terminating her parental rights rather than issuing asuspended judgment. We reject that contention. Petitioner established at the dispositional hearingthat, over the course of more than four years, the child had been removed from foster care andreturned to his mother's care numerous times but had been returned to foster care because themother had repeatedly relapsed after completing rehabilitation programs (see generally Matterof Joyce T., 65 NY2d 39, 47-48 [1985]). Petitioner further established that, at the time of thedispositional hearing, the child was thriving with his foster mother and that the foster motherwished to adopt him (see Matter of Lenny R., 22 AD3d 240 [2005], lv denied 6NY3d 708 [2006]; Matter of Philip D., 266 AD2d 909 [1999]). We thus conclude that thecourt properly determined that a suspended judgment would not be in the best interests of thechild (see Matter of Ada M.R., 306 AD2d 920, 921 [2003], lv denied 100 NY2d509 [2003]; see generally Matter of Michael B., 80 NY2d 299, 310-311 [1992]). Underthe circumstances of this case, any "progress made by [the mother] in the months preceding thedispositional determination was not sufficient to warrant any further prolongation of the child'sunsettled familial status" (Matter of Maryline A., 22 AD3d 227, 228 [2005]).Present—Scudder, P.J., Martoche, Smith, Peradotto and Pine, JJ.