IN RE: Kevin BASKERVILLE (2025)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

IN RE: Kevin BASKERVILLE, Petitioner, v. NEW YORK STATE OFFICE OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, et al., Respondents.

3682

Decided: February 13, 2025

Webber, J.P., Kennedy, Friedman, Mendez, Rodriguez, JJ.

The Gilmer Law Firm PLLC, Brooklyn (George M Gilmer of counsel), for petitioner. Letitia James, Attorney General, New York (Joshua N. Cohen of counsel), for New York State of Children and Family Services and New York Central Register of Child Abuse and Maltreatment, respondents. Muriel Goode–Trufant, Corporation Counsel, New York (D. Alan Rosinus, Jr. of counsel), for New York City Administration for Children's Services, respondent.

Determination of respondent New York State Office of Children and Family Services (OCFS), dated April 20, 2023, which, after a hearing, denied petitioner's request to amend, as unfounded, and to seal indicated reports finding maltreatment of his child, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied, and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of Supreme Court, New York County [Sabrina Kraus, J.], entered June 20, 2023) dismissed, without costs.

This Court lacks jurisdiction over this proceeding, seeking to reverse a determination by OCFS, because petitioner failed to properly effect service on the Office of the Attorney General (OAG), as required by CPLR 7804(c) (see Matter of Ambrister v. Rosa, 223 A.D.3d 969, 970, 200 N.Y.S.3d 549 [3d Dept. 2024]; Matter of J.R. v. State of New York, Dept. of Educ., 183 A.D.3d 1042, 1042–1043, 121 N.Y.S.3d 919 [3d Dept. 2020]). Petitioner failed to refute OCFS's assertion that OAG was never personally served with the petition or otherwise establish that he effectuated proper service (see J.R. v. State of New York, Dept. of Educ., 183 A.D.3d 1042, 121 N.Y.S.3d 919).

As only OCFS's determination is at issue, the petition is dismissed as to ACS. Petitioner does not object to ACS's dismissal on this ground (see Matter of Woodley v. Poole, 226 A.D.3d 461, 463, 209 N.Y.S.3d 352 [1st Dept. 2024]).

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

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.

Explore the Network