New York City

Published on: October 31, 2012

Agency Moves to have Parental Rights Terminated

by Stephen Bilkis

A neglect complaint was filed against a 16 years old mother alleging that she left her child with her mother and other unknown individuals without making adequate provisions for her care.

A New York Family Lawyer here were also allegations of poor hygiene and medical neglect with respect to a serious diaper rash. The 16 years old mother made an admission of neglect and her child was placed with the commissioner for an initial period of twelve months. The goal of the permanency plan was return to the parent and the young mother was expected to complete parenting skills classes, engage in therapy and to obtain suitable housing and employment in order to meet that goal.

A social service group was assigned as the foster care agency to manage the family. The record in court contains no evidence as to when the said agency received the contract. There are no records at all when the child was placed in care. Almost three full years, the agency placed into evidence and the only records documenting an assorted 13 months of casework by no less than five different caseworkers. The young mother testified on her own behalf and the law guardian consequently did not present any independent evidence.

Published on: October 10, 2012

Court Rules on Child Neglect Case

by Stephen Bilkis

This is an application for guardianship of a child pursuant to the provisions that are set up under the Social Services Law. The petitioner and appellant of the case is Graham Windham. The respondent of the case is Deborah K. This case is being heard in the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

Case Background

A New York Family Lawyer said the child in this case is Shantal who was born on the 26th of November, 1970. In December of 1970 Shantal was placed with the Agency voluntarily as the mother had no home for the child to live in. Shantal was placed with a foster family until April of 1971. Shantal was returned to her mother at this time.

Published on: October 3, 2012

Case Brought to Court for Father Failing to Pay Child Support

by Stephen Bilkis

This case deals with the respondent Robert Marrero and the appellant Ada Centeno. The case is being heard in the Second Division, Appellate Division, Supreme Court of the State of New York. The appellant mother, Ada Centeno is appealing an order that was made in the Family Court of Rockland County by Judge Christopher. The Order was from the 27th of March, 2009 and granted the father’s petition for sole custody of their child and denied her branch of the cross motion for sole custody of the child.

Case Background

A New York Criminal Lawyer said the two parties in this case are the parents of Summer, who was born in 2001. The couple was never married and their relationship ended while the child was still a baby. When the couple separated the child remained with the mother in the Bronx and the father lived in Rockland County with his parents. There was not an order made to award custody to either party.

Published on: September 16, 2012

Custody Awarded to Grandmother

by Stephen Bilkis

This case deals with Jessica W, Sandra A.H., et al as the petitioner and respondent. The respondent and appellant in the case is Josefina M. The appellant, Josefina M. is appealing an order that was made in the Family Court of Bronx County by Referee Peter Kuper. A New York Family Lawyer said the order granted the petition for custody of the subject child to the paternal grandmother and allowed visitation rights to the respondent mother.

Case Discussion and Decision

There were extraordinary circumstances that existed in this case and it is found that the Family Court of Bronx County properly determined that it was in the best interest of the child to grant custody to the petitioner, the paternal grandmother of the child.

Published on: September 15, 2012

Father Loses Parental Rights

by Stephen Bilkis

This case deals a dependent child under the age of eighteen years old. The respondent and appellant in the case is Frank G. The petitioner and respondent in the matter are the Catholic Guardian Society and Home Bureau.

A New York Family Lawyer said that Frank G. is appealing an order that was made in the Bronx County Family Court by Judge Carol Ann Stokinger. The order was entered around the 22nd of June, 2009 and determined that the respondent father had permanently neglected the child. The father’s parental rights were terminated by the order and custody of and guardianship of the child was given jointly to the New York City Commissioner of Social Services and the petitioner agency.

Case Discussion and Decision

Published on: August 9, 2012

Court Strives to Maintain Child’s Relationships with Both Parents

by Stephen Bilkis

Whenever a couple faces a divorce, they must also face custody decisions that involve the children of the marriage. The love that a parent has for their child is the greatest love that exists on this planet. To require that the time that they spend with that child be split with another person is heart wrenching.A New York Family Lawyer said this is especially true if the child is very small. It is not natural for a parent to spend time away from their child. Emotions run high and people who at one time loved one another enough to create a child, become mortal enemies in the quest to have all of the time that they can get with that child. Child custody disputes change people forever.

The court system of New York recognizes this problem. They strive to ensure that the welfare and security of the child is the most important consideration. The court appoints an attorney for the child or children that serves as a buffer for the children and the court. This attorney listens to the child and addresses his or her concerns during the custody hearing. It is the objective of the court to ensure that the children are considered. If the parent that the child is spending most of the time with is not given primary custody, it can have devastating effects on the psyche of the child. A New York Criminal Lawyer said that toward this goal, the court strives to create an environment where the child’s life and lifestyle is altered as little as possible by the decision of their parents to obtain a divorce.

The court system also strives to ensure that the child is encouraged to maintain a nurturing relationship with the non-custodial parent as well. Studies in recent years have demonstrated that children who are not allowed to foster a nurturing relationship with both parents whether divorced or not, do not have the benefits that are afforded to other children. When one parent is so bitter toward the other parent that they wage war on them through the children, the courts of New York will step in to remove custody from that parent. In the courts of New York, the custodial parent is entrusted with the difficult task of acting like an adult when it comes to handling the relationships of the child and the other parent. It is a sorry affair when a parent attempts to turn the child against the other parent in a divorce. A Long Island Family Lawyer divorce is an action that is taken by the parents usually based only on the relationship that the parents have with each other.

Published on: July 30, 2012

Court Decides Custody in Light of Abuse Allegations

by Stephen Bilkis

Child visitation issues in divorce actions are reliant upon the agreement of the parents, cooperation from the children, and decisions of the courts. A New York Family Lawyer said the court of New York strives to enhance the relationships of the children with their parents. However, it is not always possible for everyone involved in the situation to continue to foster a positive relationship with each other.

Many factors affect the outcome of custody decisions in the courts of New York. When a custody issue is shadowed by domestic violence, it can be even more difficult to ensure that the children continue to have a good relationship with both of their parents. When domestic violence issues are involved, the rights of the parents to have visitation with the children becomes secondary to what the court determines is in the best interest of the child. If the child would be endangered by contact with the abusive parent, then any positive benefits from visitation would be countered by the negative effects of the contact with the abuser.

This is especially true when the courts have ordered that the abuser is prevented from contacting the child or the other parent because of a protective order issued by the court. When the court determines that a protective order is necessary to protect the family members, it changes all of the rules. A New York Criminal Lawyer said protective orders are necessary to ensure the safety of family members when one or more of the parents have been charged with offenses related to domestic violence. Offenses that are included in most domestic violence laws include but in most cases are not limited to offenses related to physical assaults, such as simple assault, aggravated assault, and assaults against minors or the elderly. They include offenses related to battery, such as simple battery, aggravated battery, and battery against minors or the elderly. Some states have laws against criminal trespass that include property damage that is less than $500 in value, or going onto a property without the consent of the owner or remaining on a property without the consent of the owner. There are numerous other offenses that relate to domestic violence such as stalking, aggravated stalking, harassment, harassing phone calls, and other offenses that are used in domestic situations to instill fear in the other members of the family.

Published on: July 29, 2012

Family Court Decides Jurisdiction Issue

by Stephen Bilkis

Child custody and visitation issues in divorce actions are traumatic events in the lives of the parents and the children who are affected by the court’s decisions. Many people panic when they file for divorce and fear the loss of custody of their children. When parents panic and make bad decisions as they relate to custody issues, they can adversely affect the outcome of their custody dispute. A New York Family Lawyer said that rather than panic and remove the children from the state, it is always better to discuss your options with a qualified attorney who can fight for your rights legally. When parents abduct their children to avoid losing custody of them, they just about guarantee that they will lose custody of the child.

In June of 1979, a New York woman panicked during a divorce action and absconded with her son to Arizona. The lived in hiding in Arizona until they were discovered in 1981 and the child was returned to New York and placed in the sole custody of his father. At that point, the father filed a petition to have sole custody of the child and restrict any visitation that the mother would have no visitation with the child because he fears that she will attempt to kidnap the boy again. The court Special Term declined to modify the judgment of divorce to prevent the mother from visiting with the boy. A Nassau County Family Lawyer said the father made a motion to the Supreme Court to modify the decree. The mother countered that motion with her own motion to prevent a modification of the decree.

The court discovered that the mother had filed a motion with the Family court in Arizona. The first decision that became necessary was which court would have jurisdiction over the dispute. The New York Family Court had first declined to make any modification to the motion for a divorce decree because they felt that Arizona should have the jurisdiction over the custody dispute and that New York would be an inconvenient location to try the case. The Supreme Court disagreed. They contend that it was inappropriate for the New York Family Court to deny hearing the case and modifying the divorce decree. The original documents had been prepared in New York. New York was the registered home state of the child. The child had only been removed from New York during an illegal action. Therefore, Arizona courts should never have had any type of jurisdiction over the case at all.

Published on: July 22, 2012

Court Considers Special Needs of Infant in Custody Battle

by Stephen Bilkis

The New York child custody laws are designed to ensure that the rights of the children are protected as related to visitation and custody. In general, a parent is not restricted from visitation with their children as long as they have not harmed the children or have been found to be an unfit parent based on some other action or neglect on their part. Even in most cases of child neglect, the court will typically encourage visitation between the children and the parents so that a positive relationship can be fostered between them.

When a divorce decree determines which parent that a child will reside with most of the time, they take into account many different factors. Among these factors, are how old the child is and the relationship that the child has with each parent. Historically, a very young child has been determined to be better off with its mother. However, in some cases, where the mother has been determined to be unfit, even a very young baby may be given over to the custody of its father to receive better care. The court makes these determinations based upon what is best for the child and not necessarily what is best for the parents. A New York Family Lawyer said the court places the needs of the child paramount to the needs of the parent. In one case, a father was granted full custody of a very small baby in the course of a divorce decree. The mother appealed the custody appointment because she was a fit mother and there was no legal reason to prevent her from being with her baby.

The courts reviewed the case and discovered that she was correct. It is not clear what the circumstances were that caused the initial trial court to find that the infant would be better off with her father, but the Supreme Court determined that the original trial court was in error. There was no evidence presented that demonstrated that the mother was unfit to handle the role of parenthood. Further, it is usually important to keep a mother and very young infant together for the welfare of the infant. An NYC Family Lawyer said the original trial court was from a foreign court and the Supreme Court who overturned the verdict determined that they had erred in their judgment of the situation. A child of tender years needs to be with its mother.

Published on: June 28, 2012

Court Discusses the Rights of a Non-Marital Parent

by Stephen Bilkis

On October 15, 1999, a child was born between the petitioner mother and respondent father. The respondent father acknowledged his paternity and his name was placed on child’s birth certificate. A New York Family Lawyer said the respondent visited regularly and contributed to the child’s support for 18 months. However, the parties never married or lived together because respondent has a family of his own. Accordingly, in the spring 2001, the parties’ relationship ended, although respondent continued to call the petitioner to discuss the child during the months that followed. During the years that follow, respondent father did not visit nor give support to the child.

The mother then met and married her current husband. The mother moved out of her apartment but submitted a change of address notification form to the United States Post Office. She changed her home telephone number but kept the same cell phone number, the same job, the same work address and the same telephone number at work. The mother notified her landlord about her move.

Thereafter, the respondent father received a notice from the petitioner mother’s intent for stepparent adoption. Respondent father filed a petition seeking visitation rights and opposed the adoption. In his petition, respondent alleged that he did everything for the child. On 2006, the petitioner mother and her husband filed a stepparent adoption.