IN RE: Gabriella PATTON (2007)

In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, the father appeals from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Orange County (Bivona, J.), dated October 26, 2005, which, after a hearing, directed the issuance of an order of protection, to remain in effect until July 13, 2007, inter alia, directing the father to refrain from assaulting, stalking, harassing, and menacing the mother.

ORDERED that the order of disposition is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the petition is denied, the proceeding is dismissed, and the order of protection dated July 14, 2005 is vacated.

The allegations in the petition in a family offense proceeding seeking the issuance of an order of protection must be supported by “a fair preponderance of the evidence” (Family Ct. Act § 832;  see Matter of Dabbene v. Dabbene, 297 A.D.2d 812, 747 N.Y.S.2d 808;  Matter of Hogan v. Hogan, 271 A.D.2d 533, 705 N.Y.S.2d 678).   Here, the evidence proffered in support of the petition failed to establish that the father committed the family offense of harassment as charged in the petition (see Penal Law § 240.26[3];  Family Ct. Act § 812;  People v. Wood, 59 N.Y.2d 811, 812, 464 N.Y.S.2d 738, 451 N.E.2d 485;   People v. Chasserot, 30 N.Y.2d 898, 899, 335 N.Y.S.2d 442, 286 N.E.2d 925;  Matter of Garland v. Garland, 3 A.D.3d 496, 769 N.Y.S.2d 758;  Matter of London v. Blazer, 2 A.D.3d 860, 861;  Matter of Anonymous v. Anonymous, 23 A.D.3d 461, 803 N.Y.S.2d 915;  Matter of Sawdey-Dacey v. Dacey, 236 A.D.2d 896, 654 N.Y.S.2d 62).