In re Latanya H.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Memorandum:
In this proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10-A, the Attorney for the Child appeals from an or*1529der determining that continuing the permanency goal of placement for adoption is in the child’s best interests. We note at the outset that the appeal is moot “inasmuch as [a] superseding permanency order [] [has] since been entered” (Matter of Alexander M. [Michael M.], 83 AD3d 1400, 1401 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 704 [2011]). We conclude, however, that the exception to the mootness doctrine applies herein because the issue is likely to recur, typically evades review and…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Hearst Corp. v. ClyneNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- In re Alexander M.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- In re Sean S.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- In re Jose T.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
3Cited by4 opinions
- In re Cleophus B.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Matter of Joshua J. (Tameka J.)New York Court of Appeals · 2025
- B., CLEOPHUS, MTR. OFAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Matter of Shawn S.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2018