What did the court decide?

The appellate court affirmed that the mother neglected her child and upheld the order placing her under the county agency's supervision.

Why was the mother found to have neglected the child?

Because evidence showed her mental illness and illicit drug use caused delusions and paranoid behavior that put the child's well-being at imminent risk.

Who is affected by this decision?

The mother, the child, and the Wayne County Department of Social Services are affected because the mother remains under agency supervision and the child's protection measures remain in place.

Can this decision be appealed further?

The decision is from the Appellate Division; further appeal to the Court of Appeals would require permission and is generally limited, but the document does not state whether permission was sought.

Matter of Adelaide H. (Heather H.)

Docket 223 CAF 24-01683

Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research

FamilyAffirmed

Filed: Apr 24, 2026 · 1 week ago
Jurisdiction: New York
Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Type: Opinion
Case type: Family
Disposition: Affirmed
Citation: 2026 NY Slip Op 02548
Docket: 223 CAF 24-01683

Appeal from an order of disposition and the underlying fact-finding in a Family Court article 10 neglect proceeding.

Summary

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department affirmed Family Court's order finding Heather H. neglected her child and placing her under the supervision of the Wayne County Department of Social Services. The appeal challenged the fact-finding that the mother's mental illness and illicit drug use caused neglect, but the appellate court held petitioner proved neglect by a preponderance of the evidence. The court relied on testimony and records showing the mother experienced delusions and paranoid behavior that placed the child's physical, mental, or emotional condition in imminent danger of impairment, and affirmed the dispositional supervision order.

Issues Decided

Whether petitioner proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the child was neglected due to the mother's mental illness and substance abuse.
Whether the mother's delusions and paranoid behavior placed the child's physical, mental, or emotional condition in imminent danger of impairment.

Court's Reasoning

The court applied the Family Court Act standards and precedents requiring proof by a preponderance that a parent's mental illness and substance abuse caused neglect. Evidence at the fact-finding hearing showed the mother suffered delusions and engaged in paranoid behavior tied to her mental illness and drug use. Those conditions created an imminent danger of impairment to the child's well-being, so the court concluded the statutory neglect standard was met and affirmed the disposition placing the mother under supervision.

Authorities Cited

Family Court Act§§ 1012[f][i][B]; 1046[b][i]
Nicholson v. Scoppetta3 NY3d 357 (2004)
Matter of Zackery S.170 AD3d 1594 (4th Dept 2019)

Parties

Petitioner: Wayne County Department of Social Services
Respondent: Heather H.
Attorney: Tyson Blue
Attorney: Jeannie D'Alessandro
Attorney: Alison Bates
Judge: John L. Grow
Judge: Ann Dillon Flynn

Key Dates

Decision date: 2026-04-24
Order of Family Court dated: 2024-08-15

What You Should Do Next

1
Consult family court attorney
The mother should consult her attorney about any remaining or possible further appeals and about compliance with the supervision order's requirements.
2
Comply with supervision and treatment
Follow the Department of Social Services' case plan, including recommended mental health and substance-abuse treatment, to address the conditions that led to the neglect finding.
3
Request modification if circumstances change
If the mother's mental health or substance-use status meaningfully improves, she or her attorney can seek modification of the supervision or other dispositional orders in Family Court.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did the court decide?: The appellate court affirmed that the mother neglected her child and upheld the order placing her under the county agency's supervision.
Why was the mother found to have neglected the child?: Because evidence showed her mental illness and illicit drug use caused delusions and paranoid behavior that put the child's well-being at imminent risk.
Who is affected by this decision?: The mother, the child, and the Wayne County Department of Social Services are affected because the mother remains under agency supervision and the child's protection measures remain in place.
Can this decision be appealed further?: The decision is from the Appellate Division; further appeal to the Court of Appeals would require permission and is generally limited, but the document does not state whether permission was sought.

The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.

Full Filing Text

Matter of Adelaide H. (Heather H.) - 2026 NY Slip Op 02548

Matter of Adelaide H. (Heather H.)

2026 NY Slip Op 02548

April 24, 2026

Appellate Division, Fourth Department

IN THE MATTER OF ADELAIDE H. WAYNE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, PETITIONER-RESPONDENT;

v

HEATHER H., RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

Decided on April 24, 2026

223 CAF 24-01683

Present: Lindley, J.P., Curran, Ogden, Delconte, And Hannah, JJ.

TYSON BLUE, MACEDON, FOR RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

JEANNIE D'ALESSANDRO, LYONS, FOR PETITIONER-RESPONDENT.

ALISON BATES, VICTOR, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Wayne County (John L. Grow, J.), dated August 15, 2024, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10. The order, among other things, adjudged that respondent had neglected the subject child.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: In this proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, respondent mother appeals from an order of disposition that, inter alia, placed her under the supervision of petitioner. That order, although expired in part, brings up for review the underlying fact-finding order in which Family Court found that, as a result of the mother's mental illness and illicit drug use, she neglected the subject child (
see Matter of Clarissa F.

[Carrie W.]
, 227 AD3d 1543, 1543 [4th Dept 2024],
lv denied
42 NY3d 907 [2024];
Matter of Jimmy D.
, 302 AD2d 892, 892 [4th Dept 2003],
lv denied
100 NY2d 503 [2003]). We affirm.

Contrary to the mother's contention, we conclude that petitioner established by a preponderance of the evidence that the subject child was neglected as a result of the mother's mental illness and substance abuse (
see

Matter of Zackery S. [Stephanie S.]
, 170 AD3d 1594, 1595 [4th Dept 2019];
Matter of Thomas B. [Calla B.]
, 139 AD3d 1402, 1403-1404 [4th Dept 2016];
see generally
Family Ct Act §§ 1012 [f] [i] [B]; 1046 [b] [i];
Nicholson v Scoppetta
, 3 NY3d 357, 368-369 [2004]). The evidence at the fact-finding hearing established that, as a result of the mother's mental illness and substance abuse, the mother suffered from delusions and engaged in paranoid behavior that placed the subject child's physical, mental, or emotional condition in imminent danger of becoming impaired (
see Matter of Jahkai S. [Shirley S.]
, 216 AD3d 1432, 1432 [4th Dept 2023];
Zackery S.
, 170 AD3d at 1595;
see generally Matter of Alexis H. [Jennifer T.]
, 90 AD3d 1679, 1680 [4th Dept 2011],
lv denied
18 NY3d 810 [2012]).

Entered: April 24, 2026

Ann Dillon Flynn