| Matter of Chandel B. |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 00428 [58 AD3d 547] |
| January 27, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| In the Matter of Chandel B., an Infant. Chandel B., Sr., Appellant;Episcopal Social Services, Respondent. |
—[*1] Magovern & Sclafani, New York (Joanna M. Roberson of counsel), for respondent. Tamara A. Steckler, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Claire V. Merkine of counsel), LawGuardian.
Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Jody Adams, J.), entered on or aboutMarch 12, 2007, which, to the extent appealed from, determined that respondent father's consentwas not required for the adoption of the subject child and committed custody and guardianship ofthe child to petitioner agency and the Commissioner of Social Services for the purpose ofadoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The consent of respondent to the adoption of his child was not required since he did notmaintain "substantial and continuous or repeated contact with the child" (Domestic RelationsLaw § 111 [1] [d]). Respondent admitted to never providing financial support for the child(see Matter of Margaret Jeanette P.,30 AD3d 359 [2006]), and the evidence shows that he did not make any effort to visit orcommunicate with the child for most of the child's life, took no steps to formalize hisrelationship to his son, and made no attempt to participate in the neglect proceedings against himand the child's mother (see Matter ofSharissa G., 51 AD3d 1019 [2008]). Furthermore, respondent's contention that he wasprevented from maintaining contact with the child by the agency is belied by the record.
The court's determination that it would be in the child's best interests to free him for adoptionis supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 NY2d136, 147-148 [1984]). There is no indication that respondent is capable of caring for his son andthe record establishes that the child is doing well in his preadoptive home, which he shares withtwo of his siblings.[*2]
We have considered respondent's remaining argumentsand find them unavailing. Concur—Saxe, J.P., Gonzalez, Sweeny, Renwick andDeGrasse, JJ.