State of New York

Supreme Court, Appellate Division

Third Judicial Department

Decided and Entered: July 16, 2015 519734 

________________________________

In the Matter of BRITTANY R. 

and Others, Alleged to be 

Permanently Neglected 

Children.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

SCHOHARIE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF 

SOCIAL SERVICES,

Respondent;

ANNEMARIE R.,

Appellant.

________________________________

Calendar Date: June 1, 2015

Before: Lahtinen, J.P., Lynch, Devine and Clark, JJ.

__________

Thomas F. Garner, Middleburgh, for appellant.

David Lapinel, Schoharie County Department of Social

Services, Schoharie, for respondent.

Douglas Putnam, Warnerville, attorney for the children.

Christine Nicolella, Delanson, attorney for the child.

__________

Clark, J.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Schoharie

County (Bartlett III, J.), entered July 18, 2014, which, in a

proceeding pursuant to Family Ct Act article 10, denied

respondent's motion to vacate two prior judicial surrenders of

parental rights with respect to certain of her children.
-2- 519734 

Respondent is the mother of a daughter, Brittany R. (born

in 1997) and twins (born in 2006). In March 2014, respondent

executed judicial surrenders of parental rights with respect to

her twin children, which Family Court acknowledged and accepted

(see Social Services Law § 383-c [3]). Subsequently, respondent

moved to vacate the judicial surrenders on the basis that her

psychiatric problems had prevented her from meaningfully

participating in the proceedings. Family Court denied the

motion, and respondent appeals.

"A surrender of parental rights becomes final and

irrevocable immediately upon its execution and acknowledgment"

(Matter of Chasity O. [Douglas O.], 113 AD3d 894, 894-895 [2014]

[internal quotation marks and citations omitted]). Therefore,

"in the absence of fraud, duress or coercion, no action may be

maintained by the surrendering parent to revoke or annul the

surrender agreement" (Matter of Thomas X. [Megan X.], 80 AD3d

832, 833 [2011], lv denied 16 NY3d 710 [2011] [internal quotation

marks and citations omitted]). Initially, we note that

respondent does not claim that her judicial surrenders were

procured by fraud, duress or coercion; rather, she argues that

they were involuntary because her mental capacity was such that

she could not understand the consequences of her actions (see id.

at 833). Nevertheless, our review of the record discloses that

respondent freely and knowingly executed the judicial surrenders

with an understanding of the gravity and finality of her decision

(see Matter of Chasity O. [Douglas O.], 113 AD3d at 895).

During the colloquy with Family Court, respondent

acknowledged that she undertsood the irrevocability of the

judicial surrenders and declined supportive counseling twice. 

She also acknowledged that no physical, mental or emotional

illness prevented her from understanding the proceedings. 

Respondent's grasp of the significance of the proceedings was

further evidenced by her negotiation during the colloquy – both

through counsel and on her own – including requesting that she

receive copies of school report cards and that the proceedings be

kept confidential. Accordingly, Family Court properly denied

respondent's motion to vacate the judicial surrenders (see Matter

of Gino Z., 4 AD3d 631, 632 [2004]). 
-3- 519734 

Briefly, with regard to respondent's contention that Family

Court should not have denied her motion without a hearing,

respondent's motion lacked a legal basis upon which Family Court

may have rescinded the judicial surrenders. Therefore, no

hearing was required. In addition, we find no basis in the

record for the contention by the attorney for Brittany that

respondent signed the judicial surrenders only because she

believed that it would allow her to regain custody of Brittany. 

Family Court made it clear that the judicial surrenders of the

twin children was completely separate from whatever may occur

with regard to Brittany.

Lahtinen, J.P., Lynch and Devine, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger

Clerk of the Court