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.
FRANK S., RESPONDENT, AND TERRY W., RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
MARISA V. TEMPLE, LAW GUARDIAN, EAST SYRACUSE, FOR CORY S. AND JENNIFER D.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: In this proceeding pursuant to article 10 of the Family Court Act, respondent mother appeals from an order of fact-finding and disposition adjudging that she abused her daughter and derivatively neglected her son. We reject the mother's contention that Family Court erred in admitting in evidence the out-of-court statements of a child who was not a subject of this proceeding (see Matter of Ian H., 42 AD3d 701, 702, lv denied 9 NY3d 814). The mother failed to object to the admission in evidence of the daughter's medical records on the grounds raised on appeal and thus failed to preserve her current contentions with respect to those records for our review (see Matter of Pauline E. v. Renelder P., 37 AD3d 1145, 1146; Matter of James E., 17 AD3d 871, 873). Contrary to the mother's further contention, the findings of abuse and derivative neglect are supported by the requisite preponderance of the evidence (see § 1046[b][i] ). Petitioner established that the mother “knew or should reasonably have known” that her daughter was in danger of being physically and sexually abused by her adult son (Matter of Sara X., 122 A.D.2d 795, 796, appeal dismissed 69 N.Y.2d 707; see Matter of Lynelle W., 177 A.D.2d 1008), “and that ‘a reasonably prudent parent would have acted differently and, in so doing, prevented the injury’ “ (Matter of Rhiannon B., 237 A.D.2d 935). The finding of derivative neglect with respect to the son who is the subject of this proceeding was proper because the mother, by allowing the daughter to be abused, thereby “demonstrated a fundamental defect in [her] understanding of the duties and obligations of parenthood and created an atmosphere detrimental to the physical, mental and emotional well-being of the son as well” (Lynelle W., 177 A.D.2d at 1009; see Matter of Derrick C., 52 AD3d 1325, 1326, lv denied 11 NY3d 705).
Patricia L. Morgan
Clerk of the Court
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: CAF 08-00087
Decided: February 11, 2010
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth 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)