IN RE: Damian CHAMBERS (2026)

DECISION & ORDER

In a family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, the petitioner appeals from an order of dismissal of the Family Court, Queens County (Dean T. Kusakabe, J.), dated January 13, 2025.  The order of dismissal, after a hearing, in effect, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

ORDERED that the order of dismissal is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The petitioner and the respondent, who were never married, have two children together.  In June 2023, the petitioner commenced this family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8 against the respondent, alleging that she had committed several family offenses.  After a hearing, the Family Court, in effect, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.  The petitioner appeals.

In a family offense proceeding, the burden is on the petitioner to establish the offense by a fair preponderance of the evidence (see Family Ct Act § 832;  Matter of Warren v. Brandofino, 236 A.D.3d 917, 918, 230 N.Y.S.3d 618;  Matter of Harris v. Harris–Olayinka 181 A.D.3d 605, 605, 117 N.Y.S.3d 619).  Here, contrary to the petitioner's contention, the evidence proffered in support of the petition was insufficient to establish that the respondent committed the family offenses of attempted assault in the third degree, menacing in the third degree, disorderly conduct, or harassment in the second degree (see Family Court Act § 812[1];  Penal Law §§ 110.00, 120.00[1];  120.15, 240.20[1];  240.26[1] ).

The petitioner's remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit (see Matter of Goundan v. Goundan, 210 A.D.3d 1087, 1089, 179 N.Y.S.3d 694).

LASALLE, P.J., FORD, WAN and QUIRK, JJ., concur.