AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)

IN THE MATTER OF KEVIN C. (ANONYMOUS). COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION FOR CHILDREN'S SERVICES OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, petitioner-respondent; PEGGY C. (ANONYMOUS), respondent-respondent; MONICA DRINANE, nonparty-appellant (PROCEEDING NO. 1). IN THE MATTER OF DEVINEN C. (ANONYMOUS). COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION FOR CHILDREN'S SERVICES OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, petitioner-respondent; PEGGY C. (ANONYMOUS), respondent-respondent; MONICA DRINANE, nonparty-appellant (PROCEEDING NO. 2). IN THE MATTER OF SHAQUANA C. (ANONYMOUS). COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION FOR CHILDREN'S SERVICES OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, petitioner-respondent; PEGGY C. (ANONYMOUS), respondent-respondent; MONICA DRINANE, nonparty-appellant (PROCEEDING NO. 3). IN THE MATTER OF TESHANA C. (ANONYMOUS). COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION FOR CHILDREN'S SERVICES OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, petitioner-respondent; PEGGY C. (ANONYMOUS), respondent-respondent; MONICA DRINANE, nonparty-appellant (PROCEEDING NO. 4).

ORDERED that the dispositional order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements, and the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Kings County, for further proceedings consistent herewith.

The fashioning of an appropriate dispositional order is ordinarily a matter of discretion for the Family Court and such an order will be reversed where it lacks "sound and substantial basis in the testimony" or is "opposed to everything presented to the court" (Matter of Darlene T., 28 N.Y.2d 391, 395). The record supports the Family Court's conclusion that the respondent has demonstrated her ability to cooperate with the Administration for Children's Services (hereinafter the ACS) and to care for her children and her home when properly instructed. Accordingly, since there is no proof that the respondent is unfit to assume the duties and privileges of parenthood, the Family Court properly directed the release of the children to the custody of the mother under the supervision of the ACS for one year (see, Matter of Michael B., 80 N.Y.2d 299, 309).

However, in view of the length of time that has transpired since the dispositional order appealed from and the issuance of the order of this court, and in light of the particular circumstances of this case, the matter is remitted to the Family Court for further proceedings and a new dispositional order, if appropriate, based on the circumstances.

BRACKEN, P.J., ALTMAN, GOLDSTEIN and McGINITY, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MATTER OF KEVIN C
(Nov 13, 2001)