Legal Opinion · Dissent
In re the Adoption of Matthew D.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided July 7, 2006Published
1Dissent
Kehoe and Smith, JJ. (dissenting).
We respectfully dissent. We conclude that Surrogate’s Court erred in determining that the biological father took sufficient action in the six months preceding the placement of the child for adoption to require his consent to the adoption (see Matter of Michael D.D.S., 24 AD3d 680, 681 [2005]; Matter of Baby Girl U., 224 AD2d 869, 869-870 [1996], lv denied 88 NY2d 810 [1996]; Matter of Jarrett, 224 AD2d 1029, 1031-1032 [1996], lv dismissed 88 NY2d 960 [1996]; see generally Matter of Robert O. v Russell K., 80 NY2d 254, 262-266 [1992]; Matter of Raquel Marie…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- In re Raquel Marie X.New York Court of Appeals · 1990
- Robert O. v. Russell K.New York Court of Appeals · 1992
- John E. v. DoeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- In re the Adoption of Jarrett.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
- Raymond AA. v. DoeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.