From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Tami G.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 23, 1994
209 A.D.2d 869 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

November 23, 1994

Appeal from the Family Court of Schenectady County (Griset, J.).


On September 24, 1990 respondent and his wife, Diane G., engaged in acts of physical violence in front of their children such that seven-year-old Tami G. felt it necessary to intervene to protect her mother. Respondent appeals a finding of neglect based upon this incident contending that the proof was insufficient. Respondent, who did not testify or call witnesses, relies upon his wife's version of the events in question as the established facts. However, in light of her many contradictory statements and her admitted lying to the police and courts, Family Court found her testimony to be "highly incredible".

Diane G. was subject to a companion neglect petition and acknowledged her responsibility in the neglect of her children.

We find ample basis within the record to sustain Family Court's decision (see, Northern Westchester Professional Park Assocs. v Town of Bedford, 60 N.Y.2d 492, 499). The court had the advantage of viewing the witnesses and weighing their credibility and its determination is entitled to due deference (see, Matter of Michelle S., 195 A.D.2d 721; see also, Matter of Claudia C., 103 A.D.2d 845). Respondent's failure to testify entitles the fact finder to draw strong inferences against him as may be supported by other evidence in the record (see, Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. v. Philip De G., 59 N.Y.2d 137, 141).

Respondent engaged in a violent altercation with his wife without consideration of the presence of Tami and Angelina G. (age 19 months). Respondent exhibited a loss of control jeopardizing his family. There was no attempt by respondent to insulate his children from the acts he was perpetrating on his wife. Tami, who became involved in the fray, was in the immediate proximity of respondent's acts of violence and unreasonably placed in imminent and substantial risk of physical impairment. There is no necessity to have proof of actual injuries in order to make a finding of neglect. The facts found by Family Court established neglect as defined by Family Court Act § 1012 (f) (i) (B) (see, Matter of Maroney v. Perales, 102 A.D.2d 487, 489; see also, Matter of Coleen P., 148 A.D.2d 782; cf., Matter of Bryan L., 149 Misc.2d 899, 904).

White, Casey and Yesawich Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

In re Tami G.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 23, 1994
209 A.D.2d 869 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

In re Tami G.

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of TAMI G. and Another, Children Alleged to be Neglected…

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

Date published: Nov 23, 1994

Citations

209 A.D.2d 869 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
619 N.Y.S.2d 222

Citing Cases

Matter of V

ORDERED that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The petitioner proved by a…

Matter of Tiffany

Petitioner demonstrated by overwhelming evidence that respondent's cooperation in the severe and excessive…