From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Minella v. Perales

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 5, 1990
163 A.D.2d 629 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

July 5, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Albany County.


Petitioner seeks review of a determination denying her request to expunge a maltreatment report from the State central register of child abuse and maltreatment. The initial report was filed in April 1986 as a result of a complaint by the biological mother that petitioner had sexually abused a handicapped child placed in petitioner's care as a foster child. Following an investigation, it was determined that "some credible evidence of the alleged abuse or maltreatments exist[ed]" and the report was marked "indicated" (Social Services Law § 412). Thereafter, petitioner requested a review by the State Department of Social Services in order to expunge the report from the central register. After a review, petitioner's request for expungement was denied and she was granted an evidentiary hearing before respondent's designee. The fair hearing decision sustained the Department's determination not to expunge the indicated report. This CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.

Petitioner's contention that there was insufficient credible evidence to support respondent's determination focuses upon the credibility and weight accorded the testimony of various witnesses, including herself. However, even though reasonable minds might have weighed the witnesses' testimony differently, respondent's assessment of witness credibility is conclusive (see, Matter of Di Maria v. Ross, 52 N.Y.2d 771, 772; Matter of Golden v. Department of Social Servs., 155 A.D.2d 853). Further, since there is substantial evidence in the record which supports respondent's finding of some credible evidence that petitioner sexually abused the child, his determination must be confirmed (see, 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v. State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176; Matter of Prevost v. New York State Dept. of Social Servs., 161 A.D.2d 934; Matter of Sellnow v. Perales, 158 A.D.2d 846). We find no merit to petitioner's remaining argument that she was not given an opportunity to fully develop her case and the record.

Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Kane, J.P., Weiss, Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., and Harvey, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Minella v. Perales

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 5, 1990
163 A.D.2d 629 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

Matter of Minella v. Perales

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ESTHER MINELLA, Petitioner, v. CESAR PERALES, as…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Jul 5, 1990

Citations

163 A.D.2d 629 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
558 N.Y.S.2d 680

Citing Cases

Glasford v. New York State Department of Social Services

Moreover, New York courts consistently have applied the some evidence standard without finding any apparent…