Matter of Destinee A. (Jacquelyn M.)

2026 NY Slip Op 00890 · Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department · February 18, 2026 · No. 2024-09445; 2025-06832; 2025-06833

Summary

The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the appointment of the maternal grandfather and his wife as kinship guardians for three children and upheld the parental-access determinations concerning the youngest child. The court held that the Family Court improperly delegated its authority by conditioning the parents’ informal access to two children on those children’s consent, modified the orders to remove that condition, and remitted for a new determination of access.

Holdings

  1. The petitioners met their burden of demonstrating the requisite extraordinary circumstances to be appointed kinship guardians of the children over the father's objection.
  2. The Family Court providently exercised its discretion in finding that appointment of the maternal grandfather and his wife as kinship guardians was in the children's best interests.
  3. The denial of the father's parental access with Kholee A. was in her best interests and had a sound and substantial basis in the record.
  4. The Family Court providently exercised its discretion in establishing the mother's biweekly virtual and monthly supervised parental access with Kholee A.
  5. The Family Court improperly delegated its authority to determine parental access by conditioning the father's and mother's informal access with Destinee A. and Kaylee A. on the children's consent.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the maternal grandfather and his wife established the extraordinary circumstances required for appointment as kinship guardians over the father's objection.
  2. Whether appointment of the petitioners as kinship guardians was in the children's best interests.
  3. Whether the Family Court properly denied the father's parental access with Kholee A.
  4. Whether the Family Court properly established the mother's parental-access schedule with Kholee A.
  5. Whether the Family Court improperly delegated its authority to determine the parents' access with Destinee A. and Kaylee A. by conditioning informal access on the children's consent.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded

Cases Cited (11)

  • Matter of Tanisha M.M. [Toni D.S.—Anthony M.], 170 AD3d 841, 841-842(followed)
  • Matter of Caron C.G.G. [Alicia G.—Jasmine D.], 165 AD3d 476, 476-477(followed)
  • Eschbach v Eschbach, 56 NY2d 167, 171-174(followed)
  • Matter of Agyapon v Zungia, 150 AD3d 1226, 1227(followed)
  • Matter of Ra El v Aroepa-Hughley, 151 AD3d 974, 974(followed)
  • Matter of Ejiogu v ACS-Kings, 176 AD3d 816, 818(followed)
  • Matter of Smith v Dawn F.B., 88 AD3d 729, 729-730(followed)
  • Matter of Steward v Okon, 238 AD3d 1055, 1058(followed)
  • Matter of Mondschein v Mondschein, 175 AD3d 686, 687(followed)
  • Matter of Clezidor v Lexune, 192 AD3d 792, 794(followed)

Showing top 10 of 11.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…