Opinion
2014-04744, 2014-04745, Docket Nos. N-3113-10, N-3114-10, N-3115-10.
04-29-2015
In the Matter of LUIS N.P. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Alquiber R. (Anonymous), Sr., respondent-appellant, et al., respondent. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Alquiber L.R. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Alquiber R. (Anonymous), Sr., respondent-appellant, et al., respondent. (Proceeding No. 2) In the Matter of Joshua J.P. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Alquiber R. (Anonymous), Sr., respondent-appellant, et al., respondent. (Proceeding No. 3).
Richard Cardinale, Brooklyn, N.Y., for respondent-appellant. Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Pamela Seider Dolgow and Michael S. Legge of counsel), for petitioner-respondent. Brian O'Halloran, Staten Island, N.Y., attorney for the children.
Richard Cardinale, Brooklyn, N.Y., for respondent-appellant.
Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Pamela Seider Dolgow and Michael S. Legge of counsel), for petitioner-respondent.
Brian O'Halloran, Staten Island, N.Y., attorney for the children.
L. PRISCILLA HALL, J.P., SANDRA L. SGROI, ROBERT J. MILLER, and SYLVIA O. HINDS–RADIX, JJ.
Opinion Appeals from (1) an order of fact-finding of the Family Court, Richmond County (Karen B. Wolff, J.), dated October 4, 2013, and (2) an order of disposition of that court dated March 18, 2014. The order of fact-finding, insofar as appealed from, after a hearing, found that Alquiber R., Sr., neglected the subject children Luis P. and Joshua P., and derivatively neglected the subject child Alquiber R. The order of disposition, among other things, placed the subject children in the custody of the Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York.
ORDERED that the appeal from the order of fact-finding is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as the order of fact-finding was superseded by the order of disposition and is brought up for review on the appeal from the order of disposition; and it is further,
ORDERED that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
“At a fact-finding hearing in a neglect proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, a petitioner has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the subject child was neglected” (Matter of Negus T. [Fayme B.], 123 A.D.3d 836, 836, 996 N.Y.S.2d 544 ; see Family Ct. Act § 1046 [b][i]; Matter of Jacob P. [Sasha R.], 107 A.D.3d 719, 967 N.Y.S.2d 89 ). “Although parents have a right to use reasonable physical force against a child in order to maintain discipline or to promote the child's welfare, the use of excessive corporal punishment constitutes neglect” (Matter of Cheryale B. [Michelle B.], 121 A.D.3d 976, 977, 995 N.Y.S.2d 135 ; see Matter of Laequise P. [Brian C.], 119 A.D.3d 801, 802, 989 N.Y.S.2d 292 ; Matter of Matthew M. [Fatima M.], 109 A.D.3d 472, 970 N.Y.S.2d 271 ).In a child protective proceeding, unsworn out-of-court statements of the subject child may be received and, if properly corroborated, will support a finding of abuse or neglect (see Matter of Nicole V., 71 N.Y.2d 112, 117–118, 524 N.Y.S.2d 19, 518 N.E.2d 914 ; Matter of Mateo S. [Robin Marie Y.], 118 A.D.3d 891, 892, 987 N.Y.S.2d 616 ). The Family Court has considerable discretion in deciding whether a child's out-of-court statement has been reliably corroborated and whether the record as a whole supports a finding of neglect (see Matter of Nicole V., 71 N.Y.2d at 119, 524 N.Y.S.2d 19, 518 N.E.2d 914 ; Matter of Iouke H. [Terrence H.], 94 A.D.3d 889, 890–891, 941 N.Y.S.2d 851 ; Matter of Alexander M. [Benjamin M.], 88 A.D.3d 794, 795, 930 N.Y.S.2d 893 ; Matter of Joshua B., 28 A.D.3d 759, 814 N.Y.S.2d 210 ). Moreover, where the Family Court is primarily confronted with issues of credibility, its factual findings must be accorded considerable deference on appeal (see Matter of Cheryale B. [Michelle B.], 121 A.D.3d at 977, 995 N.Y.S.2d 135 ; Matter of Mateo S. [Robin Marie Y.], 118 A.D.3d at 893, 987 N.Y.S.2d 616 ; Matter of Jada K.E. [Richard D.E.], 96 A.D.3d 744, 949 N.Y.S.2d 58 ).
Here, a preponderance of the evidence supported the Family Court's finding that Alquiber R., Sr., neglected the children Luis P. and Joshua P. by inflicting excessive corporal punishment on them (see Matter of Ishaq B. [Lea B.], 121 A.D.3d 889, 994 N.Y.S.2d 405 ; Matter of Jenna U. [Derrick U.], 108 A.D.3d 725, 968 N.Y.S.2d 881 ; Matter of Iouke H. [Terrence H.], 94 A.D.3d at 890–891, 941 N.Y.S.2d 851 ). Contrary to Alquiber R., Sr.'s, contention, the out-of-court statements by the children Luis P. and Joshua P. were sufficiently corroborated by the testimony of a caseworker with the Administration for Children's Services and their cross-corroborating statements (see Matter of Mateo S. [Robin Marie Y.], 118 A.D.3d at 893, 987 N.Y.S.2d 616 ; Matter of Nurridin B. [Louis J.], 116 A.D.3d 770, 771, 982 N.Y.S.2d 910 ; Matter of Arique D. [Elizabeth
A.], 111 A.D.3d 625, 627, 975 N.Y.S.2d 82 ; Matter of Iouke H. [Terrence H.], 94 A.D.3d at 890–891, 941 N.Y.S.2d 851 ; Matter of Maria Daniella R. [Maria A.], 84 A.D.3d 1384, 1385, 924 N.Y.S.2d 294 ). Evidence that Joshua P. may have recanted some of his prior allegations does not mandate that the finding be set aside (see Matter of Charlie S. [Rong S.], 82 A.D.3d 1248, 920 N.Y.S.2d 187 ; Matter of Tristan R., 63 A.D.3d 1075, 1077, 883 N.Y.S.2d 229 ; Matter of Shavar B., 7 A.D.3d 619, 776 N.Y.S.2d 503 ). Although Alquiber R., Sr., and the mother of the subject children disputed the allegations, the Family Court's determination that they lacked credibility is entitled to deference and is fully supported by the record (see Matter of Sarah W. [Barbara G.F.], 122 A.D.3d 931, 997 N.Y.S.2d 164 ; Matter of Cheryale B. [Michelle B.], 121 A.D.3d at 977, 995 N.Y.S.2d 135 ).
Finally, the evidence which established that Alquiber R., Sr., engaged in a pattern of using excessive force to discipline the subject children was sufficient to support the Family Court's determination that Alquiber R. was derivatively neglected (see Matter of Matthew M. [Fatima M.], 109 A.D.3d 472, 970 N.Y.S.2d 271 ; Matter of Jacob P. [Sasha R.], 107 A.D.3d 719, 967 N.Y.S.2d 89 ; Matter of Amerriah S. [Kadiatou Y.], 100 A.D.3d 1006, 955 N.Y.S.2d 147 ).