At page 201 Best interests of child outweigh biological family claims6 citing cases“blood relative does not take precedence over a prospective adoptive parent selected by petitioner, and the fact that the child's grandmother would be a good caretaker is not a sufficient reason to remove the child from the only home she has ever known and from a family with whom she had bonded”
- In re Lundyn S., 128 A.D.3d 1406 (N.Y. App. Div. 4th Dep't 2015).published Furthermore, contrary to the father’s contention, the child’s “blood relative does not take precedence over a prospective adoptive parent selected by [petitioner], and the fact that [the child’s grandmother] would be a good caretaker is no…
- In re Julianna Victoria S., 89 A.D.3d 490 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dep't 2011).publishedThe weight of the evidence supports the finding that it is in the children’s best interests to dismiss the great-aunt’s custody petitions (see Matter of Tiffany Malika B., 215 AD2d 200, 201 [1995], lv denied 86 NY2d 707 [1995]).
- Matthew E. v. Erie Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs., 41 A.D.3d 1240 (N.Y. App. Div. 4th Dep't 2007).publishedWe further conclude that, although custody determinations generally are accorded great deference (see Matter of Carl G. v Oneida County Dept. of Social Servs., 24 AD3d 1274, 1275 [2005]), the court in this case abused its discretion in det…
- Bryce R.W. v. Orleans Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs., 32 A.D.3d 1312 (N.Y. App. Div. 4th Dep't 2006).publishedRather, the evidence supports the court’s conclusion that it was in the best interests of the children to remain in the custody of petitioner-respondent Orleans County Department of Social Services to allow their adoption by their foster p…
- Veronica G.-M. v. Monroe Cnty. Dep't of Human & Health Servs., 30 A.D.3d 1005 (N.Y. App. Div. 4th Dep't 2006).publishedVeronica G.M., a relative who is not a parent of the daughter, did not have a greater right to custody than the adoptive parents selected by the Department, who were at that time the daughter’s foster parents (see Matter of Violetta K. v M…
Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Leah Marks, J.), entered on or about December 23, 1992, which terminated respondent’s parental rights and committed the child to the custody of the Commissioner of Social Services for the purpose of adoption by her foster mother and dismissed a custody petition filed by respondent’s sister, which order was made after a fact-finding[*201] determination that respondent had abandoned her daughter pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Contrary to respondent’s contention, the court’s determination at the dispositional hearing was properly based solely on the best interests of the child; there is no presumption that such interests will best be served by placement with the natural parent (Matter of Star Leslie W., 63 NY2d 136, 147148), and no member of the child’s extended biological family has any special right to custody (Matter of Peter L., 59 NY2d 513, 520). A blood relative does not take precedence over a prospective adoptive parent selected by the authorized agency, and the fact that respondent’s sister would be a good caretaker is not a sufficient reason to remove the child from the only home she has ever known and from a family with whom she had bonded (see, Matter of D. Children, 177 AD2d 393, appeal dismissed 79 NY2d 911). The credible evidence supported the court’s ruling that the child’s best interests were served by allowing her adoption by the foster mother. Concur —Murphy, P. J., Rubin, Ross, Williams and Tom, JJ.