IN RE: PARIS M. AND PATIENCE J. (2025)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: In this proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, respondent appeals from an order of fact-finding determining, following a hearing, that he abused his girlfriend's child and derivatively abused the child's sibling. Respondent contends that petitioner failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the alleged abuse occurred inasmuch as the out-of-court allegations that he sexually abused the child were not sufficiently corroborated. Contrary to respondent's contention, Family Court did not err in determining that the child's out-of-court statements alleging that respondent sexually abused her on multiple occasions “were sufficiently corroborated by other evidence tending to support their reliability” (Matter of Lydia C. [Albert C.], 89 AD3d 1434, 1435 [4th Dept 2011]; see Family Ct Act § 1046 [a] [vi]). “Courts have considerable discretion in determining whether a child's out-of-court statements describing incidents of abuse have been reliably corroborated and whether the record as a whole supports a finding of abuse ․, and [t]he legislature has expressed a clear intent that a relatively low degree of corroborative evidence is sufficient in” child protective proceedings (Matter of Skyler D. [Joseph D.], 185 AD3d 1515, 1516 [4th Dept 2020] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Here, the sibling's accounts of the preferential treatment respondent provided to the child and the reason why the child and the sibling ran away from their mother's home “[gave] sufficient indicia of reliability to [the child's] out-of-court statements” (Matter of Janiece B. [James D.B.], 93 AD3d 1335, 1335 [4th Dept 2012] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Nicole V., 71 NY2d 112, 117-118 [1987], rearg denied 71 NY2d 890 [1988]). The allegations of sexual abuse were further corroborated by a prior determination that respondent was a level two sex offender (see Matter of Keniya G. [Avery P.], 144 AD3d 532, 533 [1st Dept 2016]). Moreover, the court had the opportunity to assess the child's credibility inasmuch as the court admitted in evidence a recording of the child's forensic interview, in which she described the incidents of abuse (see Matter of Kristina S. [Michael S.], 160 AD3d 1057, 1058 [3d Dept 2018]).

Entered: October 3, 2025

Ann Dillon Flynn

Clerk of the Court