Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003

In re Danyel Ramona C.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided June 17, 2003

306 A.D.2d 127; 760 N.Y.S.2d 499; 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7006

Cases that cite this one

8 later published cases cite this decision.

Matter of Jeffrey J.P. (Anna A.) (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
Matter of Bilet M. (Luciano M.-R.) (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
Matter of Mariama J. (Jainaba C.) (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
In re Kenneth Frederick G. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
In re Alicia G. (NYC Family Court 2010)
In re Jeremy D.R. Episcopal Social Services (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2007)
In re Christian S. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2007)
In re Jaylysia S.-W. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2006)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

—Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Clark Richardson, *128J.), entered on or about June 5, 2001, terminating respondent’s parental rights to the subject child and committing her custody and guardianship to petitioner agency, upon a fact-finding determination of permanent neglect (Marjory Fields, J.), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The agency’s diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship are established by clear and convincing evidence that the agency arranged for the child’s regular visitation with respondent, who was incarcerated, kept respondent apprised of the child’s progress and explored the resources provided by respondent (see Matter of Amanda C., 281 AD2d 714 [2001], lv denied 96 NY2d 714 [2001]). Although respondent maintained contact with the child, none of the resources he provided were viable. Respondent’s inability to provide a realistic alternative to foster care until his release from prison constituted a failure to plan for the child’s future warranting a finding of permanent neglect (see id.; Matter of Carmen N., 237 AD2d 607 [1997], lv denied 90 NY2d 805 [1997]). Termination of respondent’s parental rights so as to free the child for adoption by her foster parents, with whom the child has strongly bonded, is in the child’s best interests. Concur — Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Rosenberger and Williams, JJ.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.