From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Admin. for Children's Servs. v. Daniel A. (In re Sarah A.)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Aug 7, 2013
109 A.D.3d 467 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)

Opinion

2013-08-7

In the Matter of SARAH A. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Daniel A. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Daniel A. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent, Daniel A. (Anonymous), appellant, et al., respondent. (Proceeding No. 2).

Rhonda R. Weir, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Edward F.X. Hart and Jane L. Gordon of counsel), for petitioner-respondent.



Rhonda R. Weir, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Edward F.X. Hart and Jane L. Gordon of counsel), for petitioner-respondent.
Steven Banks, New York, N.Y. (Tamara A. Steckler and Susan Clement of counsel), attorney for the children.

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., L. PRISCILLA HALL, PLUMMER E. LOTT, and SANDRA L. SGROI, JJ.

In two related child neglect proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the father appeals from an order of fact-finding and disposition of the Family Court, Queens County (Salinitro, J.), dated January 24, 2011, which, after fact-finding and dispositional hearings, found that he neglected the subject children and placed him under the supervision of the Administration for Children's Services for a period of one year.

ORDERED that the appeal from so much of the order of fact-finding and disposition as placed the father under the supervision of the Administration for Children's Services for a period of one year is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements, as the period of supervision has expired; and it is further,

ORDERED that the order of fact-finding and disposition is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the father's contentions, the Family Court properly found that he neglected the subject children by selling controlled substances from the home and possessing multiple quantities of prescription drugs, cocaine, and marijuana, that were readily accessible to the children ( see Family Ct. Act §§ 1012[f][i][B]; 1046[a][iii]; see also Matter of Jared M. [ ernesto C. ], 99 A.D.3d 474, 474–475, 952 N.Y.S.2d 123;matter of evan E. [ Lasheen E. ], 95 A.D.3d 1114, 1114–1115, 943 N.Y.S.2d 782;Matter of Eugene L. [ Julianna H.], 83 A.D.3d 490, 921 N.Y.S.2d 61;Matter of Fernando S., 63 A.D.3d 610, 611, 883 N.Y.S.2d 469;Matter of Paul J., 6 A.D.3d 709, 710, 775 N.Y.S.2d 373;Matter of Michael R., 309 A.D.2d 590, 590–591, 765 N.Y.S.2d 358).


Summaries of

Admin. for Children's Servs. v. Daniel A. (In re Sarah A.)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Aug 7, 2013
109 A.D.3d 467 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
Case details for

Admin. for Children's Servs. v. Daniel A. (In re Sarah A.)

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of SARAH A. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's…

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

Date published: Aug 7, 2013

Citations

109 A.D.3d 467 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
970 N.Y.S.2d 273
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 5565

Citing Cases

Suffolk Cty. Dep't of Soc. Serv. v. T.-F. (In re C.-A.)

. Further, evidence demonstrating that a parent stored drugs within the home in a location that was "readily…

Westchester Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Victoria O. (In re Jamiah C.)

Thereafter, an order of disposition was entered regarding the child Jamiah C. No order of disposition…