Opinion
11-18-2016
In the Matter of AMYN C. Erie County Department of Social Services, Petitioner–Respondent; Chelsea K., Respondent–Appellant, and Isaac C., Respondent.
William D. Broderick, Jr., Elma, for Respondent–Appellant. Joseph T. Jarzembek, Buffalo, for Petitioner–Respondent. David C. Schopp, Attorney for the Child, the Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo, Inc., Buffalo (Charles D. Halvorsen of Counsel).
William D. Broderick, Jr., Elma, for Respondent–Appellant.
Joseph T. Jarzembek, Buffalo, for Petitioner–Respondent.
David C. Schopp, Attorney for the Child, the Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo, Inc., Buffalo (Charles D. Halvorsen of Counsel).
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., SMITH, DeJOSEPH, NEMOYER, AND TROUTMAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM:
In this proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, respondent mother appeals from an order that adjudicated the subject child to be neglected. We affirm. Family Court properly made the determination that the child is derivatively neglected based upon the evidence that the mother's four other children were determined to be neglected children, “ ‘including the evidence that [the mother] had failed to address the mental health issues that led to those neglect determinations and the placement of the custody of those children with petitioner’ ” (Matter of Sophia M.G.-K. [Tracy G.-K.], 84 A.D.3d 1746, 1746–1747, 922 N.Y.S.2d 907 ; see Matter of Lillianna G. [Orena G.], 104 A.D.3d 1224, 1225, 960 N.Y.S.2d 805 ). Moreover, the neglect finding with respect to the other four children was entered only two days before the subject child was born, and thus “ ‘the prior finding ... was so proximate in time to [the instant] proceeding[ ] that it can reasonably be concluded that the condition still exist[ed]’ ” (Sophia M.G.-K., 84 A.D.3d at 1747, 922 N.Y.S.2d 907 ; see also Matter of Alexisana PP. [Beverly PP.], 136 A.D.3d 1170, 1171, 25 N.Y.S.3d 707 ).
Contrary to the mother's implied contention, we conclude that the court properly took judicial notice of its own prior proceedings (see Gugino v. Tsvasman, 118 A.D.3d 1341, 1342, 987 N.Y.S.2d 753 ; Matter of Miranda F. [Kevin D.], 91 A.D.3d 1303, 1305, 938 N.Y.S.2d 694 ).
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.