New York Court of Appeals, 1982

Matter of T.

New York Court of Appeals · Decided February 25, 1982 · Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer Concur

55 N.Y.2d 1028

Cases that cite this one

11 later published cases cite this decision.

In re Robin Victoria P. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2006)
In re the Guardianship of Moses Z. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2001)
Angel Guardian Home ex rel. Natasha C. v. Nereida C. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1993)
Sheila S. Angel Guardian Home v. Shirley S. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1992)
In re Bryant S. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1992)
In re Demetrius F. Commissioner of Social Services (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1991)
In re Jamie YY. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1991)
In re Vaketa Y. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1988)
In re Edward R. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1986)
In re Susan F. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1984)
In re the Guardianship & Custody of Nereida S. (N.Y. 1982)

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

55 N.Y.2d 1028 (1982)

In the Matter of Vera T. Louise Wise Services, Respondent; Cherie T., Appellant.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York.

Argued February 9, 1982.Decided February 25, 1982.

Virginia C. Duncombe and Bernard C. Durham for appellant.

Stephen Wise Tulin for respondent.

Louis L. Frank and Yvonne Lawrence, Law Guardian, for Vera T.

Frederick A. O. Schwarz, Jr., Corporation Counsel (Marjorie Bornes of counsel), for Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York.

Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and MEYER concur.

*1029MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

Under the applicable standard that we explicated in Matter of Hime Y. (52 N.Y.2d 242) we cannot conclude that the evidence in this record was insufficient as a matter of law to sustain the determination of the Appellate Division that "at the time of trial the mother was then, and for the foreseeable future, unable by reason of her mental illness, *1030 to provide proper and adequate care for the child" (80 AD2d 511).

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

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