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: KAITLYNN I. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Jennifer I. (Anonymous), a/k/a Jennifer M. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Jonathan M. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Jennifer I. (Anonymous), a/k/a Jennifer M. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent. (Proceeding No 2)
In two related neglect proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the mother appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of fact-finding of the Family Court, Queens County (Richardson-Mendelson, J.), dated July 23, 2007, as, after a hearing, found that she had neglected the child Kaitlynn I. and, in effect, had derivatively neglected the child Jonathan M.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
Contrary to the mother's contention, the Family Court's determination that she neglected her daughter, Kaitlynn I., and derivatively neglected her son, Jonathan M., is supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see Family Ct. Act § 1046[b][i]; Matter of Philip M., 82 N.Y.2d 238, 243-244, 604 N.Y.S.2d 40, 624 N.E.2d 168; Matter of Tammie Z., 66 N.Y.2d 1, 3, 494 N.Y.S.2d 686, 484 N.E.2d 1038; Matter of Domynque F., 62 A.D.3d 697, 877 N.Y.S.2d 694).
The petitioner's medical expert testified that Kaitlynn I. sustained numerous bruises on various parts of her body which were not consistent with accidental causes and were inflicted by a blunt, flexible instrument. This evidence of injuries, which ordinarily would not occur absent an act or omission of the person responsible for the care of the child, constituted prima facie evidence of neglect (see Family Ct. Act § 1046[a] [ii] ). Once a prima facie case is established, the burden shifts to the parent to offer a satisfactory explanation for the injuries (see Matter of Philip M., 82 N.Y.2d at 244, 604 N.Y.S.2d 40, 624 N.E.2d 168; Matter of Aniyah F., 13 A.D.3d 529, 530, 788 N.Y.S.2d 119).
Here, the Family Court found, inter alia, that the testimony of the mother was not credible and that she failed to provide a reasonable and adequate explanation for the injuries. This finding is supported by the record and we find no reason to disturb it (see Matter of Domynque F., 62 A.D.3d at 697, 877 N.Y.S.2d 694; Matter of Arianna L., 55 A.D.3d 733, 866 N.Y.S.2d 263; Matter of Steven Glenn R., 51 A.D.3d 802, 803, 859 N.Y.S.2d 197).
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.
Decided: July 14, 2009
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)