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.
IN RE: ANGELICA A., A Child Under Eighteen Years of Age, etc., Carlos A., Respondent–Appellant, Administration for Children's Services, Petitioner–Respondent.
Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Sarah P. Cooper, J.), entered on or about September 7, 2017, to the extent it brings up for review a fact-finding order, same court and Judge, entered on or about September 6, 2017, which found that respondent father neglected the subject child, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from fact-finding order, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the order of disposition.
The finding that the father neglected the subject child is supported by a preponderance of the evidence. The record shows that the father inflicted excessive corporal punishment on the child by striking her with the handle of a sword on the back of her head while chasing her down a flight of stairs, causing her to sustain, among other things, cuts and lacerations on and around her ear, a concussion, and swelling to her right finger. The child's out-of-court statements were sufficiently corroborated by the agency caseworker and hospital staff's observations of the child's injuries, photographs depicting the injuries, and medical records (see Matter of Tyson T. [Latoyer T.], 146 A.D.3d 669, 45 N.Y.S.3d 459 [1st Dept. 2017]; Matter of Harrhae Y. [Shy–Macca Ernestine B.], 112 A.D.3d 512, 977 N.Y.S.2d 22 [1st Dept. 2013] ). Although the child's repetition of the same allegations that the father hit her in the back of the head with the sword handle did not provide corroboration for the out-of-court statements, the consistency of her reported statements enhanced her credibility (see Matter of David R. [Carmen R.], 123 A.D.3d 483, 484, 998 N.Y.S.2d 182 [1st Dept. 2014] ).
There exists no basis to disturb the court's credibility determinations (see Matter of Irene O., 38 N.Y.2d 776, 777, 381 N.Y.S.2d 865, 345 N.E.2d 337 [1975] ).
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.
Docket No: 6484
Decided: May 08, 2018
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)