Matter of Nikeerah S. (Barbara S.--Hale House Ctr.)

Annotate this Case
Matter of Nikeerah S. (Barbara S.) 2010 NY Slip Op 00061 [69 AD3d 421] January 7, 2010 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, March 10, 2010

In the Matter of Nikeerah S., a Child Alleged to be Permanently Neglected. Barbara S., Appellant. Hale House Center, Inc., Respondent.

—[*1] Steven N. Feinman, White Plains, for appellant.

Law Office of Alayne Katz, P.C., Irvington (Dana Forster-Navins of counsel), for respondent.

Karen Freedman, Lawyers for Children, Inc., New York (Dawn O'Brien-Gans of counsel), and Proskauer Rose LLP, New York (William H. Weisman of counsel), Law Guardian.

Order, Family Court, New York County (Susan K. Knipps, J.), entered on or about October 2, 2007, which, upon a fact-finding of permanent neglect, terminated respondent mother's parental rights and transferred custody and guardianship of the subject child to petitioner for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Any failure to assign counsel for the fact-finding hearing was occasioned solely by the mother's persistent decision to absent herself from the proceedings, despite being given several opportunities to appear and despite actual knowledge of every scheduled court date (see Matter of Starasia C., 18 AD3d 213 [2005], appeal dismissed 5 NY3d 824 [2005]; Matter of Joshua K., 272 AD2d 160 [2000], lv dismissed 95 NY2d 959 [2000]; Matter of Amy Lee P., 245 AD2d 1136 [1997]).

When the mother subsequently appeared for the dispositional hearing, counsel was appointed; the decision not to seek vacatur of the fact-finding determination did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel, since the mother lacked either a reasonable excuse for her default or a meritorious defense (see Matter of Jones, 128 AD2d 403 [1987]).

Family Court properly determined that the best interests of the child would be served by [*2]termination of parental rights, rather than a suspended judgment (see Matter of Albert E., 259 AD2d 315 [1999]). Concur—Gonzalez, P.J., Mazzarelli, Buckley, Renwick and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.