Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Bill Would Give Indigent Parents Appointed Counsel in Some Family Court Matters
Last month, the state's Senate Judiciary Committee advanced a bill that, if passed, will help indigent parents involved in child removal and placement proceedings. The bill, proposed by Chairman John A DeFrancisco, a Republican from Syracuse, would authorize Family Court judges to assign counsel to indigent parents at post-hearing conferences, if such assistance is requested. “This would ensure that the parent would have access to assistance for the critical agency case conferences that are often pivotal in determining the ultimate permanency planning goal for the child and concomitant rights of the parents,” stated Chief Administrative Judge Jonathan Lippman's request for the bill, S5255.
Judge Lippman's Family Court Advisory and Rules Committee recommended the legislation in part because of the mandate to expedite permanent placements from children under federal Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA). In recent years, the legislature has greatly increased the availability of law guardians in many stages of foster care and permanency proceedings, but offers of representation to the parents in post-hearing proceedings have lagged behind. The new ASFA timelines, although not always complied with, have added a new urgency to parents' need to be represented at all stages of permanency determinations because their parental rights can be terminated if family reunification isn't achieved within 15 months. In cases considered “emergency cases,” parental rights can be terminated even sooner.
“Continuing the involvement of counsel after the conclusion of hearings in court will significantly increase the likelihood of expeditious resolution of child welfare matters through engagement of respondent parents in the conference process,” the judiciary's memorandum to the legislature said. “Enactment of this measure … will inure to the benefit not only of the parents, but also of their children, and will better enable Family Court to fulfill its responsibilities.”
Last month, the state's Senate Judiciary Committee advanced a bill that, if passed, will help indigent parents involved in child removal and placement proceedings. The bill, proposed by Chairman John A DeFrancisco, a Republican from Syracuse, would authorize Family Court judges to assign counsel to indigent parents at post-hearing conferences, if such assistance is requested. “This would ensure that the parent would have access to assistance for the critical agency case conferences that are often pivotal in determining the ultimate permanency planning goal for the child and concomitant rights of the parents,” stated Chief Administrative Judge
Judge Lippman's Family Court Advisory and Rules Committee recommended the legislation in part because of the mandate to expedite permanent placements from children under federal Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA). In recent years, the legislature has greatly increased the availability of law guardians in many stages of foster care and permanency proceedings, but offers of representation to the parents in post-hearing proceedings have lagged behind. The new ASFA timelines, although not always complied with, have added a new urgency to parents' need to be represented at all stages of permanency determinations because their parental rights can be terminated if family reunification isn't achieved within 15 months. In cases considered “emergency cases,” parental rights can be terminated even sooner.
“Continuing the involvement of counsel after the conclusion of hearings in court will significantly increase the likelihood of expeditious resolution of child welfare matters through engagement of respondent parents in the conference process,” the judiciary's memorandum to the legislature said. “Enactment of this measure … will inure to the benefit not only of the parents, but also of their children, and will better enable Family Court to fulfill its responsibilities.”
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Role and Responsibilities of Practice Group Leaders
Ideally, the objective of defining the role and responsibilities of Practice Group Leaders should be to establish just enough structure and accountability within their respective practice group to maximize the economic potential of the firm, while institutionalizing the principles of leadership and teamwork.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?