Matter of Jada Ta-Toneyia L.
2009 NY Slip Op 07637 [66 AD3d 901]
October 20, 2009
Appellate Division, Second Department
As corrected through Wednesday, December 9, 2009


In the Matter of Jada Ta-Toneyia L. Suffolk County Department ofSocial Services, Respondent; Natasha Maria M., Appellant. Anonymous, Nonparty FosterMother.

[*1]Salvatore C. Adamo, Patchogue, N.Y., for appellant.

Christine Malafi, County Attorney, Central Islip, N.Y. (Gary Rosenthal of counsel), forpetitioner-respondent.

Regina G. Russell, Hauppauge, N.Y., for nonparty foster mother.

Robert C. Mitchell, Central Islip, N.Y. (Diane B. Groom of counsel), attorney for thechild.

In a proceeding pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b to terminate parental rightson the ground of permanent neglect, the mother appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much ofan order of fact-finding and disposition of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Freundlich, J.),dated August 15, 2008, as, after fact-finding and dispositional hearings, and upon a decision ofthe same court, also dated August 15, 2008, found that she had permanently neglected thesubject child, terminated her parental rights, and committed the child to the custody andguardianship of the Suffolk County Department of Social Services for the purpose of adoption.

Ordered that the order of fact-finding and disposition is affirmed insofar as appealed from,without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the mother's contention, the petitioner demonstrated by clear and convincingevidence that it made diligent efforts to assist her in maintaining contact with the subject childand planning for the child's future (see Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 NY2d 136, 142[1984]; Matter of Aliyanna M., 58AD3d 853, 853-854 [2009]). These efforts included facilitating visitation, providing themother with referrals, and holding numerous plan review meetings with her (see Matter ofAliyanna M., 58 AD3d at 854; Matter of Leah Tanisha A.-N., 48 AD3d 801, 802 [2008]). Despitethese efforts, the mother, inter alia, continued to use cocaine and failed to complete acourt-mandated drug treatment program. She thereby failed to plan for the child's future (see Matter of Jordan F., 62 AD3d698, 698-699 [2009]; Matter ofNoelia [*2]T., 61 AD3d 983, 984 [2009]; Matter ofLeah Tanisha A.-N., 48 AD3d at 802). Accordingly, the Family Court properly found thatthe mother permanently neglected the child.

Moreover, the Family Court properly determined that it was in the best interests of the childto be placed for adoption (see Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 NY2d at 147-148; Matterof Jordan F., 62 AD3d at 699; Matter of Noelia T., 61 AD3d at 984; Matter ofLeah Tanisha A.-N., 48 AD3d at 802; Matter of Jeremiah Kwimea T., 10 AD3d 691, 692-693 [2004]).Mastro, J.P., Balkin, Dickerson and Lott, 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.