In re Lloyd P., 99 A.D.2d 812 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984). · Go Syfert
In re Lloyd P., 99 A.D.2d 812 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
6 citation events (1 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Matter of Hayden B.S. (nyappdiv, 2019-04-26)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Hayden B.S.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2019 · confidence medium
Matter of Nikim M. , 144 AD3d 424, 424-425 [1st Dept 2016]; Matter of Alexander B. , 126 AD3d 533, 534 [1st Dept 2015]; Matter of John L. , 125 AD2d 472, 472-473 [2d Dept 1986]; Matter of Tracy B. , 80 AD2d 792, 792 [1st Dept 1981]; Myacutta A ., 75 AD2d at 774-775 ; cf. Family Ct Act § 1035 [d]; Matter of Felicia C. , 178 AD2d 530, 530 [2d Dept 1991]; Matter of Lloyd P. , 99 AD2d 812, 813 [2d Dept 1984]) or to show that it has made "diligent attempt[s]" to notify more than one parent or guardian of respondent's need to appear in Family Court .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of Lloyd P., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Feb 21, 1984.
99 A.D.2d 812
Cited by 6 opinions  |  Published

Appeal from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Kings[*813] County (Schwartz, J.), dated August 16, 1982, which, upon a fact-finding determination, made after a hearing in the Family Court, Westchester County (Facelle, J.), that appellant had committed acts which, if done by an adult, would have constituted the crimes of assault in the second degree and assault in the third degree, adjudged appellant to be a juvenile delinquent, and ordered him placed in the custody of the New York State Division for Youth. Order reversed, and fact-finding determination vacated, without costs or disbursements, and matter remitted to the Family Court, Westchester County, for appointment of a guardian ad litem and a new fact-finding hearing, in accordance herewith. It was error for the court to accept appellant’s admission of the allegations against him without first requiring a “reasonable and substantial effort” to notify his parents, and then appointing a guardian ad litem, if such effort proved unavailing (Family Ct Act, § 741, subds [a], [c]). The obviously antagonistic position taken by the school in whose custody appellant was then placed renders the presence of its officials an inadequate substitute. Accordingly, appellant is entitled to a new hearing at which he will have the guidance of the appointed guardian (see Matter ofMyacutta A., 75 AD2d 774). Titone, J. P., Lazer, Mangano and Thompson, JJ., concur.