- Court
- New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department
- Case
- Matter of Nuria D. Z. P. (Jose D. Z. M.)
- Docket
- 2025-07384
- Filed
- May 27, 2026
- Slip Op
- 2026 NY Slip Op 03314
- Citation
- 2026 NY Slip Op 03314 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep’t 2026)
Background
Jose D. Z. M., the father of a child from El Salvador, filed a petition in Family Court, Nassau County for appointment as guardian of the child under Family Court Act article 6. He also moved for the issuance of specific findings to enable the child to petition United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) for special immigrant juvenile status (SIJS) under 8 USC § 1101(a)(27)(J). The Family Court granted the guardianship petition after a hearing but denied the SIJS motion. The father appealed.
Under federal law, a child seeking SIJS must obtain findings from a state court that: (1) reunification with one or both parents is not viable due to parental abuse, neglect, abandonment, or a similar basis found under state law; and (2) it would not be in the child’s best interest to be returned to their native country or country of last habitual residence. These findings are a prerequisite to filing a SIJS petition with USCIS.
Holding
The Appellate Division, Second Department reversed the Family Court’s order and granted the father’s motion for SIJS findings. Exercising its independent factual review power — which in this context is “as broad as that of the hearing court” — the court made its own determination based on the record.
The court found that the record supported a finding that reunification of the child with her mother was not viable due to parental abandonment. The evidence established that the mother had abandoned the child, satisfying the first statutory requirement. The court further found that the record supported a finding that it would not be in the best interest of the child to return to El Salvador, her previous country of nationality and last habitual residence, citing conditions and circumstances that made return detrimental to the child’s welfare.
Takeaways
This decision is important for immigration practitioners and family law attorneys handling SIJS cases. The Appellate Division’s willingness to exercise independent factual review and make its own SIJS findings — rather than merely reviewing for abuse of discretion — provides an important safety valve when Family Courts deny SIJS motions despite supporting evidence in the record. The broad standard of review means that the appellate court can reach its own conclusions about whether the statutory criteria are met.
The case also reinforces the role that state family courts play in the federal immigration process. SIJS findings are a prerequisite to federal immigration relief, and the state court’s determination of family-related issues like abandonment, neglect, and best interests draws on the same standards that apply in other family court proceedings. Family courts should evaluate SIJS motions using established state law standards for abandonment and best interests, rather than applying heightened or novel requirements.
Why It Matters
For unaccompanied and immigrant children in New York, SIJS provides a critical pathway to lawful permanent residence when family reunification is not viable. This decision ensures that children who meet the statutory criteria are not denied access to the immigration process due to Family Court errors. The Appellate Division’s reversal and independent fact-finding demonstrates that the appellate courts will serve as a meaningful check on SIJS denials. For practitioners, the case confirms the importance of building a thorough record at the Family Court level — including evidence of abandonment, the child’s circumstances in the country of origin, and the best-interest factors — so that the appellate court has a sufficient basis for independent review if necessary.