In re Danielle R., 239 A.D.2d 305 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dep't 1997). · Go Syfert
In re Danielle R., 239 A.D.2d 305 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dep't 1997). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
8 citation events (7 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Cited for
At page 305 Order, Family Court, New York County (Mary Bednar, J.), entered on or about April 15, 1996, which denied respondent’s motion to vacate her default at the…1 citing caseopening of page *305 (no citing court says what it cites this page for)
  • In re Nicole A., 73 A.D.3d 428 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dep't 2010).published
    To vacate an order, issued on default, upon failure to appear at either a fact-finding or dispositional hearing, the movant on such a motion must establish both a reasonable excuse for the default and a meritorious defense to the allegatio…
Other citing cases1 with no pin cite or quoted language on record
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of Danielle R. and Others, Children Alleged to be Permanently Neglected. Rita R., Appellant New York Foundling Hospital
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
May 29, 1997.
Published opinion
239 A.D.2d 305
1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5729
Cited by 3 opinions  |  Published

Order, Family Court, New York County (Mary Bednar, J.), entered on or about April 15, 1996, which denied respondent’s motion to vacate her default at the fact-finding and dispositional hearings, resulting in an order entered April 11, 1996, terminating her parental rights to the subject children upon a finding of permanent neglect, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly exercised its discretion in denying respondent’s motion to vacate her default since her moving papers failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for her absence or a meritorious defense (see, Matter of "Male” Jones, 128 AD2d 403). Her claim of illness was properly rejected since •her submissions failed to establish that she was ill on the day of the proceedings, particularly in light of her previous failure to appear. No meritorious defense was established, since despite petitioners’ concerted efforts, respondent failed to complete either a parenting skills class or a drug rehabilita[*306] tion program, and the evidence adduced demonstrated that the children’s best interests were served by the termination of respondent’s parental rights (Matter of Male J., 214 AD2d 417). Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin, Williams and Andrias, JJ.