In re Jovany Isaac Benjamin M., 46 A.D.3d 374 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007). · Go Syfert
In re Jovany Isaac Benjamin M., 46 A.D.3d 374 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
3 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: People v. Hickman (nyappdiv, 2011-06-21)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Hickman
N.Y. App. Div. · 2011 · confidence medium
Under these circumstances, the Supreme Court properly concluded that substantial justice dictated the denial of resentencing (see People v Rivera, 84 AD3d 980 [2011]; People v Dennis, 84 AD3d 834 [2011]; People v Rodriguez, 83 AD3d 419 [2011]; People v Colon, 77 AD3d 849, 850 [2010]; People v Perez, 57 AD3d 921, 922 [2008]; People v Curry, 52 AD3d 732 [2008]; People v Ciriaco, 46 AD3d 374, 375 [2007]; People v Sanders, 36 AD3d 944, 946-947 [2007]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of Jovany Isaac Benjamin M., a Child Alleged to be Permanently Neglected. Joyce M., Also Known as Kim T., Appellant The Children's Aid Society
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Dec 18, 2007.
46 A.D.3d 374
Published

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Carol Stokinger, J.), entered on or about December 12, 2005, which, upon a finding of permanent neglect, terminated respondent mother’s parental rights and committed custody and guardianship of the subject child to petitioner and the Commissioner of the Administration for Children’s Services for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Clear and convincing evidence supported the court’s determination that respondent mother permanently neglected her child by failing to plan for his future (see Social Services Law § 384-b [7] [a]; Matter of Shareal Stacey S., 17 AD3d 251 [2005]). Although the agency diligently endeavored to encourage a meaningful relationship between mother and child by, inter alia, arranging for visitation referring respondent for services and providing her guidance in finding suitable housing, respondent failed to offer a viable plan for the child’s future (see Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 NY2d 136 [1984]). A fair preponderance of the evidence demonstrated that termination of her parental rights so as to facilitate adoption, rather than suspending judgment, was in the child’s best interests (Matter of Maryline A., 22 AD3d 227 [2005]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Friedman, Williams, McGuire and Kavanagh, JJ.