IN THE MATTER OF MICHAEL C

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Docket Number

2002-09336.

Attorney(S)

Michael D. Diederich, Jr., Stony Point, N.Y., for appellants Angel R.-C. and Rosa R.-C. Anne Gilleece, White Plains, N.Y., Law Guardian for appellants Johnathon C., Sarah C., Shoshana C., and Joshua C. Patricia Zugibe, County Attorney, New City, N.Y. (Radhika Nagubandi of counsel), for respondent Rockland County Department of Social Services.

Judges

William F. Mastro

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Please sign up to generate summary.

IN THE MATTER OF MICHAEL C. (Anonymous). ROCKLAND COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, ET AL., respondents; and ANGEL R.-C.(Anonymous), ET AL., appellants. (PROCEEDING NO. 1). IN THE MATTER OF JOHNATHON C. (Anonymous), appellant. ROCKLAND COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, ET AL., respondents; and ANGEL R.-C.(Anonymous), ET AL., appellants. (PROCEEDING NO. 2). IN THE MATTER OF SARAH C. (Anonymous), appellant. ROCKLAND COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, ET AL., respondents; and ANGEL R.-C. (Anonymous), ET AL., appellants. (PROCEEDING NO. 3). IN THE MATTER OF SHOSHANA C. (Anonymous), appellant. ROCKLAND COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, ET AL., respondents; ANGEL R.-C. (Anonymous), ET AL., appellants. (PROCEEDING NO. 4). IN THE MATTER OF JOSHUA C. (Anonymous), appellant. ROCKLAND COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, ET AL., respondents; ANGEL R.-C. (Anonymous), ET AL., appellants. (PROCEEDING NO. 5). IN THE MATTER OF CALEB C. (Anonymous). ROCKLAND COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, ET AL., respondents; ANGEL R.-C. (Anonymous), ET AL., appellants. (PROCEEDING NO. 6) IN THE MATTER OF LEAH C. (Anonymous). ROCKLAND COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, ET AL., respondents; ANGEL R.-C. (Anonymous), ET AL., appellants. (PROCEEDING NO. 7) (DOCKET NOS. B-2-15/01).

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The Family Court may revoke a suspended judgment after a violation hearing upon a finding supported by a preponderance of the evidence that the parents failed to comply with one or more of its conditions ( see Matter of Judith D., 307 A.D.2d 311). Here, the parents admitted that they failed to satisfy certain conditions of the suspended judgment, and the additional evidence adduced at the dispositional hearing supports the Family Court's determination that termination of their parental rights was in the best interests of the subject children ( see Matter of Judith D., supra; Matter of Leake Watts Servs., 262 A.D.2d 644; Matter of Children W., 226 A.D.2d 385).

The appellants' remaining contention is without merit.

ALTMAN, J.P., KRAUSMAN, GOLDSTEIN and MASTRO, JJ., concur.

Comments