IN RE: TA AISHA H.

Reset A A Font size: Print

IN RE: TA AISHA H., A Dependent Child Under Eighteen Years of Age, etc., Terrence H., Respondent–Appellant, Patrice J., Respondent, Administration for Children's Services, Petitioner–Respondent.

Decided: October 09, 2012

SAXE, J.P., SWEENY, RICHTER, ABDUS–SALAAM, ROMÁN, JJ. Richard L. Herzfeld, New York, for appellant. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Sharyn Rootenberg of counsel), for respondent. Tamara A. Steckler, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Amy Hausknecht of counsel), attorney for the child.

Order of fact-finding, Family Court, Bronx County (Jane Pearl, J.), entered on or about June 7, 2011, which, after a hearing, found that respondent father had neglected the subject child, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from order of disposition, same court and Judge, entered on or about June 22, 2011, which placed the child in the custody of the Administration for Children's Services until the completion of the next permanency hearing, to the extent not abandoned, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as moot.

A preponderance of the evidence supports the court's finding that respondent neglected the child by committing acts of domestic violence on the child's mother in the child's presence (see Family Court Act §§ 1012[f][i] [B], 1046[b][i]; Nicholson v. Scoppetta, 3 N.Y.3d 357, 368 [2004] ).

The court properly exercised its discretion in limiting respondent's cross examination of the child's mother concerning her prior criminal conviction and prior arrest (see People v. Schwartzman, 24 N.Y.2d 241, 244 [1969] ).

On appeal, respondent does not raise any arguments with respect to the dispositional order. In any event, to the extent the appeal from that order is not abandoned, it is moot since the placement terms of the order have expired (see Matter of Adena I. [Claude I.], 91 A.D.3d 484, 935 N.Y.S.2d 886 [1st Dept 2012] ).