Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Wilbur McREYNOLDS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Respondents-Respondents.
Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Leland DeGrasse, J.), entered December 2, 2004, which denied petitioner's application to annul the determination of respondent Office of Children and Family Services, made after a fair hearing conducted pursuant to Social Services Law § 422(8)(b), denying petitioner's request to have his name expunged from the New York State Central Register of Child Abuse and Maltreatment, and dismissed the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The findings of abuse made by Family Court in its article 10 fact-finding order dated March 16, 1995 are identical to the reports in the Central Registry that petitioner seeks to expunge. Since petitioner does not show that he was denied a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issues raised in the Family Court, and since the petitioner's burden of proof in the Family Court proceeding was a preponderance of the evidence (Family Ct. Act § 1046[b] [i] ), respondent correctly concluded that by reason of collateral estoppel, the reporting agency had established by a fair preponderance of the evidence (see Matter of Lee TT. v. Dowling, 87 N.Y.2d 699, 712, 642 N.Y.S.2d 181, 664 N.E.2d 1243 [1996] ) that the five reports in the Central Registry were substantiated (see Jeffreys v. Griffin, 1 N.Y.3d 34, 39, 769 N.Y.S.2d 184, 801 N.E.2d 404 [2003] ). We have considered petitioner's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: May 17, 2005
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)