Matter of Jerrell OO. (Andrew OO.)

Summary

The New York Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed an order restoring a neglect proceeding after the respondent substantially failed to comply with the terms of an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal. The court rejected arguments that the petitioner acted maliciously or in bad faith, finding the restoration was supported by the respondent's failure to permit home access and cooperate with the caseworker.

Holdings

1. Family Court properly determined that respondent substantially failed to comply with the ACD conditions requiring access and cooperation.
2. The court rejected respondent's claim that the Department's motion to restore the proceeding was malicious or made in bad faith.
3. The Department's letter stating that it would present no evidence and seek no further orders or services did not demonstrate malice or bad faith.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Family Court properly found that Andrew OO. substantially failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the adjournment in contemplation of dismissal.
2. Whether the Department's motion to restore the neglect proceeding was malicious or made in bad faith.
3. Whether the Department's letter declining to present evidence or seek additional orders at the dispositional hearing demonstrated malice or bad faith.

Disposition

affirmed