| Matter of Teshana Tracey T. (Janet T.) |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 02569 [71 AD3d 1032] |
| March 23, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Teshana Tracey T., Also Known as Teshana T., aChild Alleged to be Permanently Neglected. Administration for Children's Services, Respondent;Janet T., Appellant, et al., Respondent. (Proceeding No. 1.) In the Matter of Chris O'Neil T.,Also Known as Chris T., a Child Alleged to be Permanently Neglected. Administration forChildren's Services, Respondent; Janet T., Appellant, et al., Respondent. (Proceeding No. 2.) Inthe Matter of Kimberly Tanya T., Also Known as Kimberly T., a Child Alleged to bePermanently Neglected. Administration for Children's Services, Respondent; Janet T., Appellant,et al., Respondent. (Proceeding No. 3.) In the Matter of Noel Roy T., Jr., Also Known as NoelT., a Child Alleged to be Permanently Neglected. Administration for Children's Services,Respondent; Janet T., Appellant, et al., Respondent. (Proceeding No. 4.) In the Matter of JasonAlex T., Also Known as Jason T., a Child Alleged to be Permanently Neglected. Administrationfor Children's Services, Respondent; Janet T., Appellant, et al., Respondent. (Proceeding No. 5.)In the Matter of Jessica Laura T., Also Known as Jessica T., a Child Alleged to be PermanentlyNeglected. Administration for Children's Services, Respondent; Janet T., Appellant, et al.,Respondent. (Proceeding No. 6.) |
—[*1] Carrieri & Carrieri, P.C., Mineola, N.Y. (Ralph R. Carrieri of counsel), forpetitioner-respondent. Robert Modena, Douglaston, N.Y., attorney for the children Teshana Tracey T. and ChrisO'Neil T. John J. Marotta, Douglaston, N.Y., attorney for the children Kimberly Tanya T., Noel RoyT., Jason Alex T., and Jessica Laura T.
In six related proceedings pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b to terminateparental rights on the ground of permanent neglect, the mother appeals, as limited by her brief,from so much of six orders of fact-finding and disposition (one as to each child) of the FamilyCourt, Queens County (Richroath, J.), all dated June 25, 2008, as, upon a decision of the samecourt dated January 31, 2007, made after a fact-finding hearing, and upon a decision of the samecourt dated May 28, 2008, made after a dispositional hearing, found that she permanentlyneglected the children, terminated her parental rights, and transferred guardianship and custodyof the children jointly to the petitioner and the Commissioner of Social Services of the City ofNew York for the purpose of adoption.
Ordered that the appeal from the order of fact-finding and disposition pertaining to TeshanaTracey T. is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements, as that child has reached theage of 18 (see Matter of Francisco Anthony C.F., 305 AD2d 410, 411 [2003]); and it isfurther,
Ordered that the orders of fact-finding and disposition pertaining to Chris O'Neil T.,Kimberly Tanya T., Noel Roy T., Jr., Jason Alex T., and Jessica Laura T., are affirmed insofar asappealed from, without costs or disbursements.
Contrary to the mother's contention, the Family Court properly found that the motherpermanently neglected the children. The petitioner established by clear and convincing evidencethat it made diligent efforts to assist the mother in maintaining contact with the children andplanning for the children's future (see Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 NY2d 136, 142[1984]; Matter of Sheila G., 61 NY2d 368, 373 [1984]). These efforts includedfacilitating visitation, repeatedly providing the mother with referrals for services and counseling,repeatedly advising the mother that she must attend the visitation programs and therapy sessions,advising the mother that she needed to secure adequate housing for herself and the children, andproviding the mother with a referral to secure housing (see Matter of Jada Ta-ToneyiaL., 66 AD3d 901, 902 [2009], lv denied 13 NY3d 717 [2010]; Matter ofAliyanna M., 58 AD3d 853, 854 [2009]; Matter of Kayshawn Raheim E., 56 AD3d471, 472 [2008]). Despite these efforts, the mother failed to plan for the children's future (seeMatter of Sorin P., 58 AD3d 743, 744 [2009]; Matter of Amy B., 37 AD3d 600, 601[2007]).
Furthermore, the Family Court properly determined that it was in the best interests of thechildren to terminate the mother's parental rights, thus freeing them for adoption (see Matterof "Baby Boy" E., 42 AD3d 536, 536-37 [2007]; Matter of Jennifer R., 29 AD3d1005, 1007 [2006]; Matter of Desire Star H., 202 AD2d 582, 584 [1994]). Although theevidence presented at the dispositional hearing established that Chris, who is over 14 years ofage, is not prepared to consent to adoption as provided by Domestic Relations Law § 111(1) (a), the desires of a child who is over 14 years of age is but one factor that the Family Courtmay consider in determining whether termination of parental rights is in that child's best interests(see Social Services Law § 384-b [3] [k]). Under the particular facts of this case,where the [*2]father's parental rights with respect to Chris and hissiblings have been terminated on the ground of permanent neglect stemming from underlyingacts of abuse and violence, where the mother's own testimony during the dispositional hearingmade clear that she has not definitively excluded the father from her life and future plans, andwhere Chris has indicated that he does not desire to be with the father, termination of themother's parental rights with respect to Chris is in his best interests, notwithstanding hishesitancy toward adoption (cf. Matter of Kayshawn Raheim E., 56 AD3d at 473).Notably, new information, which this Court may properly consider (see Matter of MichaelB., 80 NY2d 299, 318 [1992]), indicates that Chris, after being informed of the FamilyCourt's determination to terminate the mother's parental rights, stated that he is willing to workwith his foster parents and to keep attending adoption counseling. Rivera, J.P., Florio, Angiolilloand Belen, JJ., concur.