Matter of Castellanos v. Recarte
142 A.D.3d 552
| N.Y. App. Div. | 2016Background
- Mother (Marisela Castellanos) filed Article 6 Family Court petition on Aug 28, 2015 seeking sole custody of her two children (ages 15 and 12) and, in effect, an order with special findings to enable the children to apply for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS).
- Mother alleged father died in 2004 and the family relocated from Honduras to the U.S. in 2014; petition was verified and unopposed.
- Family Court dismissed the custody petition without a hearing, reasoning the mother already had custody by operation of law as the surviving parent.
- Mother appealed, arguing the dismissal prevented the court from making the special factual findings required for SIJS and that a custody order was necessary to enable the children to petition USCIS and avoid deportation.
- Appellate Division (Second Dept.) reversed, holding the Family Court should have conducted a hearing to consider the children’s best interests and to make the requisite SIJS predicate findings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Family Court may dismiss a parent's unopposed custody petition as unnecessary because the parent "has custody by operation of law" | Castellanos: She has standing and an evidentiary hearing is required to obtain a custody order and SIJS predicate findings | Family Court: Dismissal proper since mother already had custody by operation of law | Reversed: dismissal was improper; a hearing is required |
| Whether a state family court must make factual predicate findings to permit a juvenile to apply for SIJS | Castellanos: Family Court should make findings (custody, reunification not viable, deportation not in child's best interest) so children can petition USCIS | Implicit: Court declined to engage in SIJS factfinding when custody was deemed unnecessary | Held: Family Court must hold a hearing and may make the special findings needed for SIJS; USCIS retains final immigration decision |
| Whether a natural parent has standing to seek custody for SIJS purposes | Castellanos: Natural parents may seek custody orders to secure SIJS findings | Implicitly: No barrier to standing despite presumptive custody by operation of law | Held: Natural parent has standing; unopposed petitions by parent have been granted for SIJS purposes |
| Role of state court findings relative to USCIS decisionmaking | Castellanos: State court issues factual predicate but does not decide immigration status | Respondent/Family Court: N/A — court avoided making findings | Held: State court issues predicate factual findings; ultimate SIJS grant is USCIS/ DHS discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Matter of Marisol N.H., 115 A.D.3d 185 (state court must issue SIJS predicate findings to enable USCIS petition)
- Matter of Marcelina M.-G. v Israel S., 112 A.D.3d 100 (state court's SIJS findings are factual predicates; USCIS makes final immigration decision)
- Matter of Hei Ting C., 109 A.D.3d 100 (Family Court may issue orders with special findings to permit SIJS petitions)
- Matter of Maria P.E.A. v Sergio A.G.G., 111 A.D.3d 619 (parental standing and need for court findings in SIJS context)
- Matter of Cecilia M.P.S. v Santos H.B., 116 A.D.3d 960 (Article 6 proceedings appropriate vehicle for SIJS factfinding)
- Matter of Trudy-Ann W. v Joan W., 73 A.D.3d 793 (state-law best-interest component relevant to SIJS findings)