In re Baron C., 101 A.D.3d 1622 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012). · Go Syfert
Search
In re Baron C., 101 A.D.3d 1622 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
6 citation events (6 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: G., LILLIANNA, MTR. OF (nyappdiv, 2013-03-15)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" G., LILLIANNA, MTR. OF
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · signal: see · confidence high
A suspended judgment, as -2- 262 CAF 12-00247 provided for in section 633 of the Family Court Act, “is a brief grace period designed to prepare the parent to be reunited with the child” (Matter of Michael B., 80 NY2d 299, 311 ; see Matter of Baron C., 101 AD3d 1622 , 1622; see also Matter of Ada M.R., 306 AD2d 920, 920-921 , lv denied 100 NY2d 509 ).
discussed Cited "see" In re Lillianna G.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · signal: see · confidence high
A suspended judgment, as provided for in section 633 of the Family Court Act, “is a brief grace period designed to prepare the parent to be reunited with the child” (Matter of Michael B., 80 NY2d 299, 311 [1992]; see Matter of Baron C. [Dominique C.], 101 AD3d 1622 , 1622 [2012]; see also Matter of Ada M.R., 306 AD2d 920, 920-921 [2003], lv denied 100 NY2d 509 [2003]).
discussed Cited "see" In re Lillianna G.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · signal: see · confidence high
A suspended judgment, as provided for in section 633 of the Family Court Act, “is a brief grace period designed to prepare the parent to be reunited with the child” (Matter of Michael B., 80 NY2d 299, 311 [1992]; see Matter of Baron C. [Dominique C.], 101 AD3d 1622 , 1622 [2012]; see also Matter of Ada M.R., 306 AD2d 920, 920-921 [2003], lv denied 100 NY2d 509 [2003]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of Baron C. and Others, Infants. Erie County Department of Social Services, Respondent Dominique C.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Dec 21, 2012.
101 A.D.3d 1622
Published

Memorandum: In this proceeding pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b, respondent mother appeals from an order that, inter alia, terminated her parental rights with respect to the three subject children and ordered that they be freed for adoption. Contrary to the mother’s contentions, the record supports Family Court’s determination that a suspended judgment, i.e., a “brief grace period designed to prepare the parent to be reunited with the child” (Matter of Michael B., 80 NY2d 299, 311 [1992]), was not in the best interests of the children (see Matter of Jane H. [Susan H.], 85 AD3d 1586, 1587 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 709 [2011]). “The court’s determination at the dispositional hearing is entitled to great deference, particularly because it depended in large part on the court’s assessment of the credibility of the witnesses” (Matter ofAlyshia M.R., 53 AD3d 1060, 1061 [2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 707 [2008]). Finally, to the[*1623] extent that the mother’s contentions are based on matters outside the record on appeal, they are not properly before us (see Matter of Gridley v Syrko, 50 AD3d 1560, 1561 [2008]; Matter of Harry P. v Cindy W., 48 AD3d 1100, 1100 [2008]). Present — Scudder, P.J., Smith, Centra, Lindley and Whalen, JJ.