Opinion
2014-02708, Docket Nos. N-14944-12, N-14943-12, N-26433-12.
10-14-2015
In the Matter of CRYSTAL A. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, respondent, Chigozirim C.A. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Emmanuel A. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, respondent, Chigozirim C.A. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 2) In the Matter of Joshua A. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, respondent, Chigozirim C.A. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 3).
Michael A. Fiechter, Bellmore, N.Y, for appellant. Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Richard Dearing and Scott Shorr of counsel), for respondent. Seymour W. James, Jr., New York, N.Y. (Tamara A. Steckler and Claire V. Merkine of counsel), attorney for the children.
Michael A. Fiechter, Bellmore, N.Y, for appellant.
Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Richard Dearing and Scott Shorr of counsel), for respondent.
Seymour W. James, Jr., New York, N.Y. (Tamara A. Steckler and Claire V. Merkine of counsel), attorney for the children.
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., RUTH C. BALKIN, THOMAS A. DICKERSON, and JEFFREY A. COHEN, JJ.
Opinion Appeal from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Kings County (Ilana Gruebel, J.), dated November 21, 2013. The order, insofar as appealed from, after a dispositional hearing, directed the father to enter and complete a batterer's accountability program. The appeal from the order of disposition brings up for review an order of fact-finding of that court dated June 12, 2013, which, after a fact-finding hearing, found that the father neglected the children Crystal A. and Emmanuel A., and derivatively neglected the child Joshua A.
ORDERED that the order of disposition is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
In a child protective proceeding, the petitioner has the burden of proving neglect by a preponderance of the evidence (see Family Ct. Act §§ 1012[f][i][B] ; 1046[b][i]; Matter of Amerriah S. [Kadiatou Y.], 100 A.D.3d 1006, 955 N.Y.S.2d 147 ). Here, contrary to the father's contentions, a preponderance of the evidence established that he neglected the children Crystal A. and Emmanuel A. by engaging in certain acts of domestic violence against the mother in their presence that impaired, or created an imminent danger of impairing, their physical, mental, or emotional condition (see Nicholson v. Scoppetta, 3 N.Y.3d 357, 368, 787 N.Y.S.2d 196, 820 N.E.2d 840 ; Matter of Jeremiah W. [Ronald W.], 130 A.D.3d 838, 12 N.Y.S.3d 579 ; Matter of Briana A.-C. [Edward A.-M.], 125 A.D.3d 771, 773, 4 N.Y.S.3d 95 ; Matter of Ariella S. [Krystal C.], 89 A.D.3d 1092, 1093, 934 N.Y.S.2d 422 ), and by inflicting excessive corporal punishment on them (see Matter of Jallah J. [George J.], 118 A.D.3d 1000, 1001, 989 N.Y.S.2d 91 ; Matter of Amerriah S. [Kadiatou Y.], 100 A.D.3d at 1007, 955 N.Y.S.2d 147 ). The petitioner further established, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the father derivatively neglected the child Joshua A. (see family ct. act § 1046[a][i] ; matter of tayleese M.C. [tunisha H.], 127 A.D.3d 1077, 1078–1079, 7 N.Y.S.3d 464 ; Matter of Kaleb B. [Harold S.], 119 A.D.3d 780, 781, 989 N.Y.S.2d 345 ).
The father's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.