IN RE: ALYSSA L.D. (2008)

 We reject the contention of respondent mother in appeal No. 1 that Family Court's determination that she neglected her two daughters is not supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see Family Ct. Act § 1046[b][i] ).   Petitioner presented evidence that the apartment in which the mother resided with her daughters was both unsanitary and unsafe (see Matter of Nathifa B., 294 A.D.2d 432, 742 N.Y.S.2d 646, lv. denied 98 N.Y.2d 616, 752 N.Y.S.2d 2, 781 N.E.2d 914;  Matter of Noemi B., 273 A.D.2d 304, 708 N.Y.S.2d 477), that the younger daughter suffered from bottle rot, abscesses and infections as the result of poor dental hygiene (see generally Munson v. Lippman, 2 A.D.3d 1252, 1253, 770 N.Y.S.2d 448), and that the older daughter was not consistently provided with adequate clothing (see Matter of Rebecca KK., 51 A.D.3d 1086, 1087, 856 N.Y.S.2d 705).   Contrary to the contention of the mother, we conclude that petitioner met its burden of establishing that the “physical, mental or emotional condition [of the children] has been impaired or is in imminent danger of becoming impaired as a result of the failure of [the mother] to exercise a minimum degree of care” (§ 1012[f][i] ).

 We reject the further contention of the mother in appeal Nos. 2 and 3 that the court erred in dismissing her violation petitions.   The mother failed to meet her burden of establishing that the respondents in those proceedings, the petitioner in appeal No. 1 and the daughters' paternal grandparents, willfully violated prior orders by interfering with the mother's visitation rights (see Matter of Antonio EE. v. Schoharie County Dept. of Social Servs., 30 A.D.3d 702, 703, 817 N.Y.S.2d 405).

It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal from the order insofar as it concerned disposition is unanimously dismissed as moot (see Matter of Justice T., 305 A.D.2d 1076, 1077, 758 N.Y.S.2d 732, lv. denied 100 N.Y.2d 512, 767 N.Y.S.2d 393, 799 N.E.2d 616) and the order is affirmed without costs.

MEMORANDUM: