IN RE MOONA C., AND OTHERS, DEPENDENT CHILDREN UNDER EIGHTEEN YEARS OF AGE, ETC., CHARLOTTE K., res-ap, THE ADMINISTRATION FOR CHILDREN'S SERVICES, pet-res

10317-10318. IN RE MOONA C., AND OTHERS, DEPENDENT CHILDREN UNDER EIGHTEEN YEARS OF AGE, ETC., CHARLOTTE K., res-ap, THE ADMINISTRATION FOR CHILDREN'S SERVICES, pet-res — Carol Lipton, Brooklyn, for ap — Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Janet L. Zaleon of counsel), for res — TAMARA A. STECKLER, THE LEGAL AID SOCIETY, NEW YORK (PATRICIA COLELLA OF COUNSEL), ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILDREN, MOONA C. AMAL K. AND NADIA K. KAREN FREEDMAN, LAWYERS FOR CHILDREN, INC., NEW YORK (SHIRIM NOTHENBERG OF COUNSEL), ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD ROBINA C.—Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Jody Adams, J.), entered on or about October 26, 2009, which, to the extent it brings up for review the order of fact-finding, entered on or about May 1, 2009, determining, after a hearing, that respondent mother neglected the subject children, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from the fact-finding order, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the dispositional order.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

10317-10318. IN RE MOONA C., AND OTHERS, DEPENDENT CHILDREN UNDER EIGHTEEN YEARS OF AGE, ETC., CHARLOTTE K., res-ap, THE ADMINISTRATION FOR CHILDREN’S SERVICES, pet-res — Carol Lipton, Brooklyn, for ap — Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Janet L. Zaleon of counsel), for res — TAMARA A. STECKLER, THE LEGAL AID SOCIETY, NEW YORK (PATRICIA COLELLA OF COUNSEL), ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILDREN, MOONA C. AMAL K. AND NADIA K. KAREN FREEDMAN, LAWYERS FOR CHILDREN, INC., NEW YORK (SHIRIM NOTHENBERG OF COUNSEL), ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD ROBINA C.—Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Jody Adams, J.), entered on or about October 26, 2009, which, to the extent it brings up for review the order of fact-finding, entered on or about May 1, 2009, determining, after a hearing, that respondent mother neglected the subject children, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from the fact-finding order, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the dispositional order.

Respondent’s challenge to an interim order suspending her visitation with the children is not before this Court because no appeal was taken from that order and the issue was rendered moot by her consent to entry of a final order of disposition providing for supervised visitation with the children (see Matter of Sandra G. v. Victor P., 71 AD3d 588 [1st Dept 2010], lv dismissed 15 NY3d 862 [2010]; Family Court Act §1030). In any event, the determination to suspend visitation had a sound and substantial basis in the record (see Matter of Latisha C. [Wanda C.], 101 AD3d 1113 [2d Dept 2012]).

IN RE MOONA C., AND OTHERS, DEPENDENT CHILDREN UNDER EIGHTEEN YEARS OF AGE, ETC., CHARLOTTE K., res-ap, THE ADMINISTRATION FOR CHILDREN'S SERVICES, pet-res

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal