Case Name: In the Matter of Nishe Rasheen G., a Child Alleged to be Abandoned and/or Permanently Neglected. Earl Rasheen G., Appellant; Cardinal McCloskey Services et al., Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2014-02-04
Citations: 114 A.D.3d 416
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of Nishe Rasheen G., a Child Alleged to be Abandoned and/or Permanently Neglected. Earl Rasheen G., Appellant; Cardinal McCloskey Services et al., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 114
Pages: 416–416

Head Matter:
In the Matter of Nishe Rasheen G., a Child Alleged to be Abandoned and/or Permanently Neglected. Earl Rasheen G., Appellant; Cardinal McCloskey Services et al., Respondents.
[979 NYS2d 565]

Opinion:
Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Gayle E Roberts, J.), entered on or about November 26, 2012, which, upon a fact-finding determination that respondent father abandoned and permanently neglected his child, terminated his parental rights, and committed custody and guardianship of the child to petitioner agency and the Administration for Children's Services for the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The court properly determined that respondent abandoned the child by failing to make even minimal efforts to maintain contact with the agency during his incarceration. In the context of abandonment, a showing of diligent efforts by an authorized agency to encourage the parent's relationship with the child is not required (see Matter of Gabrielle HH., 1 NY3d 549, 550 [2003]; Matter of Omar Saheem Ali J. [Matthew J.], 80 AD3d 463 [1st Dept 2011]). In any event, the agency established that it nonetheless made such diligent efforts and, therefore, the court also properly determined that respondent permanently neglected the child by failing to maintain contact, provide support, gifts or letters for the child, and by failing to address the conditions that led to the child's placement into foster care (see Matter of Nathaniel T., 67 NY2d 838, 840 [1986]).
In light of the foregoing, the court also properly determined that it was in the best interest of the child to terminate respondent's parental rights to free the child for adoption. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, Acosta, Saxe and Moskowitz, JJ.