In re Karen C.
111 A.D.3d 622
| N.Y. App. Div. | 2013Background
- Karen C., born in El Salvador Jan 1993, came to the U.S. circa 2007 and lived with her mother and stepfather; her father abandoned her before birth and provided no support.
- Karen’s mother left her in El Salvador with the maternal grandmother until the mother emigrated to the U.S.; the mother did not abandon Karen after Karen’s arrival to the U.S.
- In 2013 Karen petitioned under Family Court Act article 6 to have her stepfather (Juan C.G.) appointed coguardian alongside her mother.
- Karen simultaneously moved for an order with specific findings to permit her to apply for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(27)(J).
- Family Court granted the guardianship petition but denied the SIJS-related motion, finding Karen failed to show reunification with one or both parents was not viable and that return to El Salvador would be against her best interests.
- The appellate court reviewed the record (affidavits from Karen and her mother), reversed, found Karen dependent on the Family Court, and granted the motion for SIJS-related findings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Karen qualifies as a "juvenile" dependent for SIJS purposes | Karen is under 21, unmarried, and was placed under custody by the Family Court via guardianship | Family Court implicitly accepted guardianship but declined SIJS findings initially | Court: Karen is dependent/legally committed to an individual appointed by the court and satisfies juvenile dependency requirement |
| Whether reunification with one or both parents is not viable due to abandonment/neglect | Karen argued father abandoned her and reunification with him is not viable; mother did not abandon but one-parent inability suffices | Family Court found plaintiff failed to show reunification with one or both parents was not nonviable | Court: Father’s abandonment establishes nonviability as to at least one parent; SIJS statutory language permits "1 or both" parents to be nonviable |
| Whether return to El Salvador would be contrary to Karen’s best interests | Karen presented affidavits showing returning would not be in her best interests | Family Court concluded Karen did not meet the burden to show return would be contrary to her best interests | Court: Record supports finding that return to El Salvador would not be in Karen’s best interests |
| Whether Family Court must issue specific findings to permit SIJS application | Karen requested explicit findings to enable USCIS filing | Family Court refused to issue findings after denying nonviability/best-interest elements | Court: Family Court should have made and issued the SIJS-specific findings; motion granted |
Key Cases Cited
- Matter of Mohamed B., 83 A.D.3d 829 (App. Div. 2011) (discusses SIJS nonviability and best-interest requirements)
- Matter of Trudy-Ann W. v Joan W., 73 A.D.3d 793 (App. Div. 2010) (addresses SIJS standards for reunification and best interests)
- Matter of Alamgir A., 81 A.D.3d 937 (App. Div. 2011) (nonviability due to parental abandonment supports SIJS findings)
- Matter of Emma M., 74 A.D.3d 968 (App. Div. 2010) (considers parental abandonment in SIJS eligibility)
- Matter of Marcelina M.-G. v Israel S., 112 A.D.3d 100 (App. Div. 2013) (clarifies that nonviability may be shown as to one parent under SIJS statute)