Skip to main content

IN RE: KANIKA M. (2000)

Reset A A Font size: Print

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

IN RE: KANIKA M., et al., (Anonymous). Administration for Children Services, respondent; Alfred K. (Anonymous), appellant.

Decided: March 27, 2000

LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, J.P., CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, THOMAS R. SULLIVAN and DANIEL F. LUCIANO, JJ. Frank A. Buono, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant. Michael D. Hess, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Pamela Seider Dolgow and Elizabeth S. Natrella of counsel), for respondent. Monica Drinane, New York, N.Y. (Henry S. Weintraub of counsel), Law Guardian for the children.

In a child protective proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the father appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Staton, J.), dated April 24, 1998, as, after a fact-finding hearing, found that he had neglected the subject children.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The petitioner proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the two subject children were neglected by the father (see, Family Ct. Act §§ 1046[b][i], 1012 [f][i];  Matter of K. Children, 253 A.D.2d 764, 677 N.Y.S.2d 379).   The evidence presented at the fact-finding hearing demonstrated, inter alia, that the older child was exposed to domestic violence in the home and that the father should have known that the mother was abusing drugs while she was pregnant with their younger child (see, Matter of Athena M., 253 A.D.2d 669, 678 N.Y.S.2d 11;  Matter of Deandre T., 253 A.D.2d 497, 676 N.Y.S.2d 666;  Matter of Lonell J., 242 A.D.2d 58, 673 N.Y.S.2d 116;  see also, Matter of K. Children, supra).

The father's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.


Was this helpful?

Thank you. Your response has been sent.

Copied to clipboard