Matter of Rosa M. M.-G. v Dimas A. (2021 NY Slip Op 03033) Matter of Rosa M. M.-G. v Dimas A. 2021 NY Slip Op 03033 Decided on May 12, 2021 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. Decided on May 12, 2021 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P. BETSY BARROS LINDA CHRISTOPHER PAUL WOOTEN, JJ. 2020-05141 (Docket No. G-9184-19) [*1]In the Matter of Rosa M. M.-G. (Anonymous), appellant, vDimas A. (Anonymous), respondent. Jadeja-Cimone Law, P.C., Hempstead, NY (Alex N. Ortiz Castro of counsel), for appellant. DECISION & ORDER In a guardianship proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appeals from an amended order of the Family Court, Nassau County (Eileen C. Daly-Sapraicone, J.), dated July 13, 2020. The amended order, insofar as appealed from, without a hearing, in effect, denied those branches of the mother's motion which were pursuant to 8 USC § 1101(a)(27)(J) for specific findings that reunification of the subject child with his birth father is not viable due to parental abandonment, and that it would not be in the subject child's best interests to be returned to Nicaragua, his previous country of nationality and last habitual residence, as there is no one to care for him or protect him in that country, and thereupon, made specific findings that reunification with the father is not viable as there was no male listed on the child's birth certificate, and that it would not be in the best interests of the child to be returned to Nicaragua, his previous country of nationality and last habitual residence, because the mother resides in the United States of America. ORDERED that on the Court's own motion, the notice of appeal from an order dated May 15, 2020, is deemed to be a premature notice of appeal from the amended order dated July 13, 2020 (see CPLR 5520[c]); and it is further, ORDERED that the amended order dated July 13, 2020, is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law and the facts, without costs or disbursements, those branches of the mother's motion which were pursuant to 8 USC § 1101(a)(27)(J) for specific findings that reunification of the subject child with his birth father is not viable due to parental abandonment, and that it would not be in the subject child's best interests to be returned to Nicaragua, his previous country of nationality and last habitual residence, as there is no one to care for him or protect him in that country are granted, and it is found that reunification of the subject child with his birth father, Dimas A., is not viable due to parental abandonment, because the birth father abandoned the child by failing to ever provide him with any care or financial support, and that it would not be in the …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals