Legal Opinion

In re Latanya H.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided November 18, 2011PublishedCited by 4 opinions

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

  1. Hearst Corp. v. ClyneNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
  2. In re Alexander M.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
  3. In re Sean S.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
  4. In re Jose T.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. In re Cleophus B.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
  2. Matter of Joshua J. (Tameka J.)New York Court of Appeals · 2025
  3. B., CLEOPHUS, MTR. OFAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
  4. Matter of Shawn S.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2018

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API