| Matter of Isiah Steven A. (Anne Elizabeth Pierre L.) |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 08072 [100 AD3d 559] |
| November 27, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| In the Matter of Isiah Steven A. and Others, Children Alleged to bePermanently Neglected. Anne Elizabeth Pierre L., Appellant; New Alternatives for Children,Inc., Respondent. |
—[*1] Law Offices of James M. Abramson, PLLC, New York (James M. Abramson of counsel), forrespondent. C/O Ballon Stoll Bader & Nadler, P.C., New York (Frederic P. Schneider of counsel),attorney for the children.
Orders of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Sidney Gribetz, J.), entered on or aboutDecember 14, 2009, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, revoked asuspended judgment entered on a finding of permanent neglect, terminated respondent mother'sparental rights to the subject children, and committed custody and guardianship of the children topetitioner agency and the Commissioner of Social Services for the purpose of adoption,unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The finding that respondent had violated the terms of the suspended judgment is supportedby a preponderance of the evidence (see Matter of Michael B., 80 NY2d 299, 311 [1992];Matter of Aliyah Careema D. [SophiaSeku D.], 88 AD3d 529 [1st Dept 2011]). Respondent admittedly failed to attend allvisits with the children and all doctor's appointments, failed to obtain adequate housing and asteady income, and failed to understand each child's medical needs (see Matter of Gianna W. [Jessica S.],96 AD3d 545, 545 [1st Dept 2012]). Any lapses by the agency did not relieve respondent ofher responsibility to comply with the terms of the suspended judgment (Matter of Lourdes O., 52 AD3d203, 203 [1st Dept 2008]).
A preponderance of the evidence supports the determination that termination of respondent'sparental rights is in the children's best interests (Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 NY2d 136,147-148 [1984]). The children have been in the same foster homes for at least three years, andthey have foster parents who have provided for their special needs and wish to adopt them(Aliyah, 88 AD3d at 529-530). A further suspended judgment is not warranted, given thatrespondent has made only minimal progress in obtaining the ability to care [*2]for the children. Concur—Tom, J.P., Saxe, Richter,Abdus-Salaam and Feinman, JJ.