A custody petition brought by the adult half sister of a child was properly dismissed where the child had been freed for adoption and the child's guardianship had been granted to foster parents, a state appeals court has ruled.

In reaching the decision, an Appellate Division, First Department panel ruled that the half sister's “recourse” had been “to seek adoption, not custody of the child,” and near the opinion's end, the panel noted that the adult half sister's “kinship tie with the child” did not “afford her greater standing than the child's foster parents.”

The panel of Justices Dianne Renwick, Judith Gische, Barbara Kapnick, Cynthia Kern and Peter Moulton affirmed the 2017 decision of Bronx Family Court Justice Gilbert Taylor denying the adult half sister's custody petition.

The justices' opinion did not name the child or the foster parents, and the half sister was not named in full.

The justices wrote that the Family Court had “properly dismissed” the half sister's petition because the child had been freed for adoption and custody had been awarded, and they noted that the half-sister's “prior guardianship petition had been dismissed with prejudice.”

The justices then wrote in their April 16 decision that “contrary to [the half sister's] contention, she was not entitled to participate in a best interests hearing on the child's proposed adoption by his foster parents.”

“There was no adoption petition before Family Court to warrant a hearing,” the justices wrote, adding, “indeed, Family Court properly dismissed the petition for custody without a hearing, as petitioner's recourse was to seek adoption, not custody of the child.”

“In any event,” the justices also said, “other than her kinship tie with the child, which did not afford her greater standing than the child's foster parents,” citing Social Services Law § 383[3] and Matter of Diane T. v. Shawn N., the half sister “failed to show that awarding her custody would be in the child's best interests.”

“The record shows that the child, who has special needs, was loved and well cared for in the foster home, and would be adversely affected by being removed,” the justices further wrote.

Carol Kahn, an attorney in New York, was counsel for the adult half sister. Kahn declined to comment on the decision.

Douglas Reiniger, an attorney with Rosin Steinhagen Mendel in New York, represented a respondent in the appeal, The Children's Aid Society. In an emailed statement Monday, he said that “the Appellate Division's decision to affirm the Family Court's dismissal of the petition for custody brought by the child's half-sister … is supported by a long line of cases that hold that adoption is the sole and exclusive means to gain permanency for children in foster care whose parental rights have been terminated.”

He added that “the appellant sister filed numerous petitions for custody … [but] she never petitioned for adoption, even though the mother's parental rights were terminated in 2015.” He also said that “there was a history of Family Court findings that adoption was in the child's best interests.”

Raymond Rogers, an attorney for The Legal Aid Society in New York, was counsel for the child and could not be reached.