In re Darlenea T., 122 A.D.3d 1416 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014). · Go Syfert
In re Darlenea T., 122 A.D.3d 1416 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
3 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
examined Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Noah C. (Greg C.) (3×) also: Cited "see", Cited "see, e.g."
N.Y. App. Div. · 2024 · confidence medium
Although other new facts and allegations asserted by petitioner suggest that termination of respondents' parental rights might remain in the best interests of the oldest child, the second oldest child, and the third oldest child, we conclude that the record before us is no longer sufficient to determine whether termination of respondents' parental rights is in the best interests of those children ( see Darlenea T. , 122 AD3d at 1417; Gena S. , 101 AD3d at 1595; Malik S. , 101 AD3d at 1777-1778; Shad S. , 67 AD3d at 1360 ; see generally Michael B. , 80 NY2d at 318 ).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of Darlenea T. and Another, Infants. Erie County Department of Social Services, Respondent Wanda A.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Nov 21, 2014.
122 A.D.3d 1416
Centra, Fahey, Lindley, Smith, Whalen.
Published

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Erie County (Sharon M. Lo Vallo, J.), entered November 8, 2012 in a proceeding pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b. The order revoked a suspended judgment and terminated the parental rights of respondent.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, and the matter is remitted to Family Court, Erie County, for a new dispositional hearing in accordance with the following memorandum: Re[*1417] spondent mother appeals from an order that, inter alia, revoked the suspended judgment entered upon a finding of permanent neglect and terminated her parental rights with respect to her children in this proceeding pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b. We conclude that petitioner established by a preponderance of the evidence that the mother failed to comply with the terms of the suspended judgment (see Matter of Shad S. [Amy C.Y.], 67 AD3d 1359, 1360 [2009]). Nevertheless, based on new facts and allegations that we may properly consider, we further conclude that it is not clear that termination of the mother’s parental rights is in the best interests of the children (see id.; see also Matter of Leval B. v Kiona E., 115 AD3d 665, 667 [2014]). We therefore reverse the order and remit the matter to Family Court for a new dispositional hearing to determine the children’s best interests.

Present — Smith, J.P, Centra, Fahey, Lindley and Whalen, JJ.