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
Apr 05, 2001

In re Trebor UU.

Respondent, the mother of two sons, Trebor (born in 1992) and Tahran (born in 1994), appealed an order from the Family Court of Clinton County which terminated her parental rights on the grounds of mental illness. The children had been in the care and custody of the petitioner since December 1998, following a prior finding of neglect. In October 2000, the petitioner filed a petition to terminate parental rights. The Family Court determined that respondent suffered from a mental illness, as defined by Social Services Law § 384-b (6) (a), rendering her unable to provide proper and adequate care for her children for the present and foreseeable future. Respondent challenged the expert testimony's methodology and the sufficiency of evidence regarding her future incapacity. The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court's order, finding that the expert testimony was sufficiently based and that there was clear and convincing evidence that respondent's mental illness prevented her from caring for her children, despite conflicting expert opinions on future improvement.

Parental Rights TerminationMental Illness (Parent)Family Court ActSocial Services LawExpert TestimonyClinical PsychologyPersonality DisorderAppellate DecisionChild WelfareForeseeability
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Evelyn B.

The petitioner initiated proceedings to terminate the parental rights of the respondent, mother of Evelyn B., alleging mental illness or retardation after Evelyn B. was adjudicated neglected. The Family Court, Clinton County, terminated parental rights, relying on testimony from a court-appointed clinical psychologist who diagnosed the respondent with an untreatable learning disorder and mixed personality disorder, rendering her unable to provide proper care. The respondent appealed, presenting testimony from her treating therapist suggesting potential improvement. The appellate court affirmed the Family Court's decision, finding clear and convincing evidence supporting the termination due to the respondent's mental illness and upholding the Family Court's discretion in crediting the court-appointed psychologist over the respondent's therapist, whose expert qualification was also appropriately denied.

Parental Rights TerminationMental IllnessChild NeglectFamily LawAppellate ReviewClinical PsychologyForensic EvaluationPersonality DisorderLearning DisorderExpert Witness Credibility
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 27, 1994

In re the Guardianship & Custody of Angela Marie N.

This case concerns an appeal from an order of disposition in Family Court, New York County, which terminated a respondent's parental rights. The termination was based on a finding of mental illness, supported by extensive unrefuted evidence including the respondent's chronic degenerating mental condition, frequent hospitalizations, and failure to adhere to any treatment plan. A court-appointed psychiatrist concluded there was no possibility of improvement in the foreseeable future, confirming the respondent's inability to provide adequate care for her children. The appellate court unanimously affirmed the order, finding clear and convincing evidence for the termination and that the disposition, committing guardianship to the petitioner, was in the children's best interests. Furthermore, the court found no ineffective assistance of counsel, stating that strategic decisions should not be reevaluated with hindsight.

Parental Rights TerminationMental IllnessChild WelfareGuardianshipIneffective Assistance of CounselAppellate ReviewFamily LawBest Interests of the ChildSocial Services Law
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Commitment of Star A.

This dissenting opinion addresses a petition to terminate a respondent mother's parental rights, brought on grounds of permanent neglect and mental illness, though the agency proceeded solely on permanent neglect. The Family Court dismissed the petition, finding the agency failed to make diligent efforts. The dissenting judge argues that the Family Court's decision should be reversed, asserting the agency's efforts were reasonable given the mother's extreme non-cooperation. The mother consistently failed to maintain contact, plan for her children, attend scheduled visits, and keep psychiatric appointments, frustrating the agency's attempts to strengthen the parental relationship. The judge concludes that terminating parental rights is necessary for the children's best interests and their chance at a normal childhood.

Parental RightsPermanent NeglectDiligent EffortsSocial Services LawBest Interests of ChildFoster CareParental Non-CooperationFamily Court DecisionAppellate DissentChild Welfare
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Hime Y.

This appeal concerns the termination of a natural mother's parental rights to her children, Suzanne and Hime, focusing on the ground of 'mental illness.' Previously, the case involving Suzanne was remanded due to an erroneous 'no-fault' theory, and a separate proceeding for Hime had dismissed termination, granting custody to foster parents with visitation rights for the mother. The appellate court now scrutinizes the record for the first time regarding the 'mentally ill' contention, considering medical reports, caseworker testimonies, and drawing an unfavorable inference from the mother's failure to present her own psychiatric evidence. The court found 'clear and convincing' proof that the mother suffered from a residual form of schizophrenia, preventing her from properly caring for Hime and putting the child in danger of neglect. Consequently, the Family Court's order dismissing causes relating to Hime was modified; the petition to terminate parental rights based on mental illness was granted, the mother's visitation privileges were vacated, and the matter was remanded for further proceedings.

Parental Rights TerminationMental IllnessSchizophreniaChild NeglectAppellate ReviewFamily Court ActSocial Services LawVisitation RightsFoster CarePsychiatric Evaluation
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Mair-Headley v. County of Westchester

The petitioner, a correction officer, was terminated from her employment by the Westchester County Department of Corrections after being absent for over one year due to a nonoccupational injury, pursuant to Civil Service Law § 73. She challenged this determination through a CPLR article 78 proceeding, alleging denial of due process and violation of the Human Rights Law. The Supreme Court initially dismissed the due process claim and transferred the remaining issues to this Court. This Court confirmed the determination, finding that the petitioner received adequate pre-termination notice and a post-termination hearing, satisfying due process. Additionally, the Court concluded that the termination did not violate the Human Rights Law, as employers are not obligated to create new light-duty or permanent light-duty positions for accommodation.

Civil Service LawCPLR Article 78Due ProcessHuman Rights LawEmployment TerminationCorrection OfficerDisability AccommodationWestchester CountyAppellate ReviewPublic Employment
References
21
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Mark GG

The appellant, mother of an out-of-wedlock infant born in 1975, placed her son with the Clinton County Department of Social Services. After a period of mental health issues, including a schizophrenia diagnosis, she surrendered the infant for adoption. She later sought to revoke the surrender, which was initially denied by Family Court but reversed on appeal. Subsequently, the Department of Social Services counterclaimed to terminate her parental rights based on permanent neglect and mental illness. The Family Court ordered termination, but the appellate court reversed, finding insufficient evidence for termination based on mental illness and a lack of proof for permanent neglect, citing the agency's intransigence. The matter was remitted to Family Court for further custody proceedings.

Parental Rights TerminationChild CustodyMental IllnessSchizophreniaPermanent NeglectAdoptionFamily CourtAppellate ReviewSurrender RevocationSocial Services Law
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re the Guardianship of Brandon D.

This case involves an appeal regarding a proceeding to terminate parental rights. The appellate court unanimously affirmed the Family Court's decision, which determined that the respondent was unable to provide proper and adequate care for her children due to mental illness. This finding was supported by clear and convincing evidence, including testimony and documentary evidence from three psychiatrists and a social worker, with no countervailing evidence presented by the respondent. The appellate court also concluded that a separate dispositional hearing was not necessary in this instance.

Parental Rights TerminationMental IllnessChild WelfareFamily LawAppellate ReviewClear and Convincing EvidenceSocial Services LawInadequate Parental CarePsychiatric EvaluationWayne County Family Court
References
7
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 11, 2002

Termine v. Continental Baking Co.

Salvatore Termine, a plaintiff, appealed an order from the Supreme Court, Westchester County, which granted summary judgment to the defendant, Continental Baking Company (CBC), dismissing his personal injury complaint. Termine was injured in October 1998 while employed by Interstate Brands Corporation (IBC). CBC, the record owner of the property, had merged with its parent IBC in 1995, and its authority to do business in New York terminated shortly thereafter. The appellate court affirmed the Supreme Court's decision, ruling that Termine's action was barred by Workers’ Compensation Law § 11 because his employer, IBC, was the actual owner of the property at the time of the accident, not CBC. The court also rejected Termine's argument regarding CBC's failure to file a deed, stating Real Property Law § 291 protects purchasers, not personal injury claimants.

Workers' Compensation ExclusivityMerger of CorporationsReal Property OwnershipSummary JudgmentPersonal Injury DamagesAppellate ReviewEmployer ImmunityDelaware Corporation LawNew York Business LawDeed Filing
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In Re the Guardianship of Star Leslie W.

Respondent, mother of Star Leslie W., appealed the termination of her parental rights due to permanent neglect. The Family Court found she failed to plan for her child's future despite the agency's diligent efforts, a finding affirmed by the Appellate Division. The Court of Appeals upheld the lower courts' decisions, emphasizing the agency's extensive efforts, including a trial placement of the child with the mother, which ultimately failed due to the mother's unstable living conditions and lack of commitment. The court also addressed procedural arguments, affirming that a continuous one-year period of neglect, regardless of when it occurred after the child entered agency care, is sufficient. Ultimately, the decision prioritized the child's best interests, noting the respondent's chronic mental illness and borderline intelligence contrasted with the stable preadoptive home.

Permanent neglectParental rights terminationDiligent effortsChild welfareFoster careVisitationParental planningBest interests of the childFamily Court proceedingsAppellate review
References
13
Showing 1-10 of 2,358 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