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: BENJAMIN S.S. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, respondent; Randy S. (Anonymous), appellant.
DECISION & ORDER
In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the father appeals from an order of fact-finding of the Family Court, Queens County (Emily Ruben, J.), dated March 7, 2017. The order of fact-finding, after a fact-finding hearing, found that the father neglected the subject child.
ORDERED that the order of fact-finding is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The petitioner commenced this proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, alleging that the father neglected the subject child, an infant. After a fact-finding hearing, the Family Court found that a preponderance of the evidence established that the father neglected the child by leaving him alone and unattended, and by committing acts of domestic violence against the mother in the child's presence, thereby creating an imminent danger of impairment to the child's physical condition. The father appeals.
To establish neglect of a child, the petitioner must demonstrate, by a preponderance of the evidence (see Family Ct Act § 1046[b][i] ), (1) that the child's physical, mental, or emotional condition has been impaired or is in imminent danger of becoming impaired, and (2) that the actual or threatened harm to the child is a consequence of the failure of the parent or caretaker to exercise a minimum degree of care in providing the child with proper supervision or guardianship (see Family Ct Act § 1012[f][i][B]; Nicholson v. Scoppetta, 3 N.Y.3d 357, 368, 787 N.Y.S.2d 196, 820 N.E.2d 840).
Here, the petitioner demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that the father neglected the child by leaving him unattended in the mother's apartment (see Matter of Kayden H. [Kareena H.], 104 A.D.3d 764, 765, 961 N.Y.S.2d 252; Matter of Samuel D.-C., 40 A.D.3d 853, 854, 837 N.Y.S.2d 170), and by engaging in acts of domestic violence in the presence of the child that created an imminent danger of impairing his physical condition (see Matter of Marina Y. [Gamal Y.], 156 A.D.3d 894, 895, 65 N.Y.S.3d 747; Matter of Brilliance B. [Sydell B.], 133 A.D.3d 652, 653, 19 N.Y.S.3d 561; Matter of Kaleb B. [Harold S.], 119 A.D.3d 780, 781, 989 N.Y.S.2d 345).
MASTRO, J.P., COHEN, HINDS–RADIX and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.
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: 2017–03702
Decided: July 18, 2018
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)