The dispositional order directed that appellant be placed in the custody of respondent OCFS, with initial placement to be with Pius XII, a non-secure facility. Inasmuch as appellant was placed with Pius XII, his subsequent transfer to a limited secure facility, due to the imminent revocation of Pius XII's license, did not violate the order (Family Ct Act § 353.3 [4]). Moreover, inasmuch as the limited secure facility chosen by OCFS is located relatively close to appellant...
Let's get started

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.