| Matter of Naquan L.G. (Carolyn C.) |
| 2014 NY Slip Op 04927 [119 AD3d 567] |
| July 2, 2014 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
[*1]
| 1 In the Matter of Naquan L.G. Graham WindhamFamily and Children's Services et al., Respondents; Carolyn C., Appellant. (ProceedingNo. 1.) In the Matter of Tanzania N.C. Graham Windham Family and Children's Serviceset al., Respondents; Carolyn C., Appellant. (Proceeding No.2.) |
Daniel P. Moskowitz, Jamaica, N.Y., for appellant.
Carrieri & Carrieri, P.C., Mineola, N.Y. (Ralph R. Carrieri of counsel), forrespondent Graham Windham Family and Children's Services.
Angela S. Hull, Jamaica, N.Y., attorney for the children.
In related proceedings pursuant to Social Services Law § 383-c, themother appeals from an order of the Family Court, Queens County (McGowan, J.), datedJanuary 30, 2013, which denied her motion to vacate the judicial surrenders of herparental rights executed on January 20, 2011.
Ordered that the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Queens County, for areconstruction hearing with respect to those portions of the proceedings conducted in theabove-entitled cases on January 20, 2011, which could not be transcribed because thetape recordings were inaudible, and thereafter to report to this Court with all convenientspeed, and the appeal is held in abeyance in the interim.
The mother contends, among other things, that her judicial surrenders of her parentalrights executed on January 20, 2011, were invalid because the Family Court failed tocomply with the requirements of Social Services Law § 383-c (3) (b).However, the issues raised by the mother on appeal cannot be resolved on the recordprovided to this Court since relevant portions of the proceedings held on January 20,2011, could not be transcribed because the tape recordings were inaudible (see Matter of Olson v Olson, 8AD3d 285, 286 [2004]). Accordingly, we remit the matter to the Family Court,Queens County, for a reconstruction hearing with respect to those portions of theproceedings conducted in the above-entitled cases on January 20, 2011, which could notbe transcribed because the tape recordings were inaudible, and the appeal is held inabeyance in the [*2]interim (see Matter of Chu Man Woo vQiong Yun Xi, 100 AD3d 883 [2012]; Matter of Garner v Garner, 88 AD3d 708 [2011]). Dillon,J.P., Hall, Sgroi and Barros, JJ., concur.