Matter of Micah Zyair F.W. (Tiffany L.)

Annotate this Case
Matter of Micah Zyair F.W. (Tiffany L.) 2013 NY Slip Op 06959 Decided on October 24, 2013 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on October 24, 2013
Sweeny, J.P., Renwick, Feinman, Clark, JJ.
10871

[*1]In re Micah Zyair F.W., A Dependent Child Under the Age of Eighteen Years, etc.,

and

Tiffany L. Respondent-Appellant, Leake and Watts Services, Inc., Petitioner-Respondent.




Geoffrey P. Berman, Larchmont, for appellant.
Law Office of James M. Abramson, PLLC, New York (Dawn
M. Orsatti of counsel), for respondent.
Andrew H. Rossmer, Bronx, attorney for the child.

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Anne-Marie Jolly, J.), entered on or about September 20, 2012, to the extent it is based upon the finding that respondent mother permanently neglected the subject child, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner agency established by clear and convincing evidence that it made diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship, including referring respondent to programs addressing her drug abuse, anger management issues, and parenting skills, and that nevertheless respondent failed to complete any program, visit consistently, or take steps to provide a stable and suitable home for the child
(see Matter of Sheila G., 61 NY2d 368 [1984]; Matter of Amilya Jayla S. [Princess Debbie A.], 83 AD3d 582 [1st Dept 2011]; Matter of Arden Jermaine H., 33 AD3d 369 [1st Dept 2006], lv denied 8 NY3d 809 [2007]; Social Services Law § 384-b[3][g][i], [7][a]). [*2]

The court properly denied counsel's request for an adjournment when respondent, who was fully aware of the scheduled date for continuation of the fact-finding hearing, did not appear.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: OCTOBER 24, 2013

CLERK

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.