General
In the Matter of Rolando Candelaria, Appellant, v. Vanessa Nardil et al., Respondents
154 A.D.3d 74861 N.Y.S.3d 513·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·2017·NY
Balkin, J.P., Hinds-Radix, Duffy and Connolly, JJ., concur.
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
In the Matter of Rolando Candelaria, Appellant, v Vanessa Nardil et al., Respondents.
[61 NYS3d 513]
[MAJORITY]
Appeal by the petitioner from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Edward W. Yuskevich, Ct. Atty. Ref.), dated April 21, 2016. The order dismissed, without a hearing, the petition for visitation, with prejudice.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The Family Court lacks the authority to direct continuing contact between a parent and child where, as here, the petitioning parent’s parental rights have been involuntarily terminated and the children have been freed for adoption (see Matter of Hailey ZZ. [Ricky ZZ.], 19 NY3d 422, 438 [2012]; Matter of Joshua J.C. [Jose C.], 145 AD3d 883, 884-885 [2016]; Matter of Jamel D.G. [Monique G.], 108 AD3d 766, 767 [2013]). Accordingly, the Family Court properly dismissed, without a hearing, the petition for visitation, with prejudice.
Balkin, J.P., Hinds-Radix, Duffy and Connolly, JJ., concur.