Opinion
03-23-2017
In re MACIN D., and Another, Children Under the Age of Eighteen Years, etc., Miguel D., Respondent–Appellant, Administration for Children's Services, Petitioner–Respondent.
Neal D. Futerfas, White Plains, for appellant. Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Janet L. Zaleon of counsel), for respondent. Tamara A. Steckler, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Diane Pazar of counsel), attorney for the children.
Neal D. Futerfas, White Plains, for appellant.
Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Janet L. Zaleon of counsel), for respondent.
Tamara A. Steckler, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Diane Pazar of counsel), attorney for the children.
TOM, J.P., FRIEDMAN, MAZZARELLI, KAPNICK, KAHN, JJ.
Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Sarah P. Cooper, J.), entered on or about January 29, 2016, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, found, after a hearing, that respondent father had neglected the subject children, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
A preponderance of the evidence adduced at the fact-finding hearing established that the children were neglected by the father within the meaning of the Family Court Act (Nicholson v. Scoppetta, 3 N.Y.3d 357, 368, 787 N.Y.S.2d 196, 820 N.E.2d 840 [2004] ; Family Ct. Act § 1012[f] ). The evidence before the Family Court, which included the father's aggressive and intimidating behavior in front of the children, causing them visible distress, and incidents of domestic violence against the children's mother while the children were present, was sufficient to establish that the children were subject to actual or imminent danger of injury or impairment of their emotional and mental condition (see e.g. Matter of Naveah P. [Saquan P.], 135 A.D.3d 581, 22 N.Y.S.3d 857 [1st Dept.2016] ; Matter of Patrice S., 63 A.D.3d 620, 620–621, 882 N.Y.S.2d 409 [1st Dept.2009] ). The Family Court's credibility determinations are entitled to deference (Matter of Irene O., 38 N.Y.2d 776, 381 N.Y.S.2d 865, 345 N.E.2d 337 [1975] ; see Matter of Allyerra E. [Alando E.], 132 A.D.3d 472, 473, 17 N.Y.S.3d 634 [1st Dept.2015], lv. denied 26 N.Y.3d 913, 2015 WL 8816675 [2015] ).
We have considered the father's procedural and due process arguments, and find them unavailing. The father has not shown that he was prejudiced by any delay in the fact-finding proceeding.