CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Guardianship of Lebron

This case involves an appeal concerning the permanent neglect of a child, Jason, placed in foster care in 1982 due to his parents' eviction and drug addiction. The Family Court found permanent neglect but dismissed the petitions, ruling the petitioner agency failed to demonstrate diligent efforts to strengthen the parental relationship. The appellate court affirmed the finding of permanent neglect, agreeing that the parents failed to plan for Jason's future or maintain regular contact. However, the court reversed the Family Court's finding on diligent efforts, concluding that the petitioner agency had, in fact, met its burden of proving diligent efforts despite the parents' chronic drug addiction and lack of cooperation. The court emphasized that an agency is not a guarantor of an uncooperative parent's success.

Permanent NeglectChild WelfareFoster CareParental RightsDiligent EffortsDrug AddictionRehabilitation ProgramsFamily Court AppealSocial Services LawParental Responsibility
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Victor WW.

This case involves an appeal from a Family Court order in Schenectady County that dismissed a petition to adjudicate the respondent's twin children as permanently neglected. The children were removed from the mother's care in 2008 after being injured by her paramour, and she admitted neglect due to untreated mental illness. The petitioner initiated permanent neglect proceedings in March 2011. The Family Court found that while the petitioner made diligent efforts, it failed to prove the mother did not plan for her children's future. The appellate court reviewed the decision, noting that Family Court did not fully address the domestic violence risk. However, the record shows the mother eventually completed a domestic violence program and ceased contact with the paramour, demonstrating meaningful steps to address the conditions leading to removal. The appellate court affirmed the Family Court's order, concluding that there was no clear and convincing proof that the mother substantially and continuously failed to plan for her children's future.

Permanent NeglectParental Rights TerminationChild WelfareDomestic Violence AwarenessMental Health TreatmentFamily Court AppealAppellate Division ReviewDiligent Efforts by AgencyParental Planning FailureSocial Services Law 384-b
References
14
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Patrick H.

This case involves an appeal stemming from an order of the Family Court of Tompkins County that adjudicated Patrick H. a permanently neglected child and subsequently terminated the parental rights of the respondent. The child's initial neglect adjudication in 1991 was based on findings that the respondent exposed him to sexual abuse. During the permanent neglect proceeding initiated by the petitioner, allegations were made that diligent efforts were exerted to strengthen the parent-child relationship, but the respondent failed to plan for the child's future, notably by not completing a sex offender treatment program or admitting to prior sexual abuse. The Family Court sided with the petitioner, leading to the termination of parental rights, a decision challenged by the respondent on appeal. The appellate court affirmed the Family Court's order, dismissing the respondent's arguments concerning the admission of the entire case file and the petitioner's alleged failure to make diligent efforts, concluding that the respondent's own actions hindered his access to necessary treatment.

Permanent NeglectParental Rights TerminationChild WelfareDiligent EffortsSex Offender TreatmentFamily CourtAppellate ReviewEvidentiary RulingsChild ProtectionTompkins County
References
10
Case No. 2017 NY Slip Op 05774
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 30, 2017

Matter of Jessica U. (Stephanie U.)

The Chemung County Department of Social Services initiated proceedings to terminate Stephanie U.'s parental rights, alleging permanent neglect of her six children. Following a lengthy fact-finding hearing, the Family Court found five children permanently neglected, returned the oldest to the mother's care, ordered a one-year suspended judgment for two, and terminated parental rights for the three youngest children. Stephanie U. appealed this decision, challenging both the finding of permanent neglect and the termination of parental rights. The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court's order, concluding that the Department had made diligent efforts to strengthen the parental relationship and that the mother had failed to adequately plan for her children's future. The court also determined that the termination of parental rights for the three youngest children was in their best interests, noting their stability in preadoptive homes.

Permanent NeglectParental Rights TerminationDiligent EffortsChild CustodyFamily LawAppellate ReviewBest Interests of ChildrenFoster CareSuspended JudgmentSocial Services
References
10
Case No. 2019 NY Slip Op 01291 [169 AD3d 1240]
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 21, 2019

Matter of Logan C. (John C.)

This case involves an appeal by John C. from orders of the Family Court of Schuyler County, which adjudicated his children, Logan C. and another, to be permanently neglected and terminated his parental rights. The children were initially removed from respondent's custody after the daughter sustained severe injuries, leading to findings of abuse and neglect. Despite petitioner Schuyler County Department of Social Services' diligent efforts to provide services like mental health counseling and parent education, respondent failed to adequately plan for the children's future or address the underlying issues, including failing to engage in consistent mental health treatment and parent education, and maintaining contact with the caretaker responsible for the daughter's injuries. The Appellate Division, Third Department, found ample support for the Family Court's determination of permanent neglect and affirmed the termination of respondent's parental rights, concluding it was in the children's best interests given their progress in foster care and respondent's lack of substantial improvement. The court dismissed the appeal from the fact-finding order as non-dispositional, but reviewed the issues in conjunction with the appeals from the dispositional orders.

Parental Rights TerminationChild NeglectChild AbuseAppellate ReviewFamily LawSocial Services LawDiligent EffortsReunification PlanBest Interests of ChildrenPsychological Evaluation
References
23
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Snyder

This case concerns an appeal from an order of permanent neglect regarding the respondent's children. The court applied the higher standard of 'clear and convincing evidence' for the termination of parental rights, as established by Santosky v Kramer. The petitioner, Seneca County Department of Social Services, demonstrated that the respondent failed to maintain substantial and continuous contact with her children, visiting only twice in the year prior to the hearings, and that the agency exercised due diligence in attempting to strengthen the parental relationship. The respondent's constitutional arguments, asserting a lack of oral notification of rights and challenging the statute, were rejected as she failed to show she was aggrieved and had waived due process claims in court. Consequently, the Seneca County Family Court's order of permanent neglect was unanimously affirmed.

Parental Rights TerminationPermanent NeglectStandard of ProofClear and Convincing EvidenceAgency DiligenceSocial Services LawConstitutional ChallengeDue Process WaiverVoluntary PlacementFoster Care
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 18, 2003

In re Arnold M.

The mother appealed an Orange County Family Court order terminating her parental rights due to permanent neglect. The Family Court's decision, which found permanent neglect and determined that termination was in the children's best interests, was affirmed by the appellate court. The Orange County Department of Social Services successfully demonstrated that the mother failed to comply with court-ordered drug, alcohol, and mental health counseling. The appellate court concluded that the Family Court providently exercised its discretion in declining to suspend judgment, deferring to its evaluation despite the Law Guardian's differing recommendation. A contention raised by the Law Guardian concerning the admission of a former case worker's notes was deemed not properly before the court.

Parental Rights TerminationPermanent NeglectBest Interests of ChildrenFamily Court DecisionAppellate ReviewSocial Services LawFailure to RehabilitateCourt-Ordered CounselingDrug and Alcohol AbuseMental Health Non-Compliance
References
15
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Matter of Angelo AA.

This appeal concerns a Family Court order that adjudicated two children, Angelo AA. and Ryan CC., as permanently neglected and terminated respondent's parental rights. The respondent mother appealed this decision, arguing that the petitioner agency failed to make diligent efforts toward reunification. The appellate court found that the petitioner did make diligent efforts, providing services for respondent's aggressive behavior, parenting skills, drug dependency, and domestic violence issues. Despite completing some programs, the respondent continued to struggle with substance abuse, maintaining healthy relationships, and consistent mental health counseling. Consequently, the appellate court affirmed the Family Court's order, concluding that the children were permanently neglected and parental rights were appropriately terminated, also upholding the preclusion of an expert witness.

Parental Rights TerminationPermanent NeglectDiligent EffortsFamily ReunificationSubstance AbuseDomestic ViolenceParenting SkillsMental Health CounselingExpert Witness PreclusionDue Process
References
8
Case No. 2018 NY Slip Op 07207 [165 AD3d 1506]
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 25, 2018

Matter of Keadden W. (Hope Y.)

This case involves an appeal concerning the termination of Hope Y.'s parental rights over her three children, including Keadden W., following a finding of permanent neglect. The Albany County Department for Children, Youth and Families initiated the proceeding, leading to Family Court orders in August 2015 and May 2016 which adjudicated permanent neglect and terminated parental rights, respectively. The Appellate Division, Third Department, dismissed the appeal from the initial fact-finding order but affirmed the dispositional order. The court found that the petitioner made diligent efforts to strengthen the mother-child relationship and that the mother failed to develop a realistic plan for her children's future. The decision also highlighted the mother's struggles with mental health, unstable housing, substance abuse, and poor parenting skills, concluding that termination was in the children's best interests.

Parental Rights TerminationPermanent NeglectChild WelfareFamily Court ActSocial Services LawAppellate ReviewDiligent EffortsBest Interests of the ChildInadequate ParentingReunification Services
References
23
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 31, 1996

In re Josephine O.

This case involves an appeal from an order of the Family Court of Greene County, which granted the petitioner's application to declare the respondent's children permanently neglected and terminated her parental rights. The Greene County Department of Social Services (DSS) initiated the original neglect proceeding after finding the children left unsupervised in an unsanitary home with no edible food. Despite diligent efforts by DSS to reunite the family, including providing parenting classes, a parent aide, and substance abuse treatment recommendations, the respondent failed to cooperate, missing numerous appointments and failing to address her issues. The appellate court affirmed the Family Court's decision, concluding that DSS fulfilled its statutory duty and that the respondent failed to plan for her children's future, thereby supporting the termination of her parental rights.

Parental RightsPermanent NeglectDiligent EffortsFamily ReunificationSubstance AbuseParenting SkillsChild WelfareGreene CountyAppellate DecisionSocial Services Law
References
4
Showing 1-10 of 5,953 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational