Opinion
2015-03-11
In the Matter of DAZAHNAE S. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Derek S. (Anonymous), respondent-appellant, et al., respondent. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Dijore S. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Derek S. (Anonymous), respondent-appellant, et al., respondent. (Proceeding No. 2) In the Matter of Dazah S. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Derek S. (Anonymous), respondent-appellant, et al., respondent. (Proceeding No. 3) In the Matter of Dynasty S. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Derek S. (Anonymous), respondent-appellant, et al., respondent. (Proceeding No. 4) In the Matter of Destiny B. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Derek S. (Anonymous), respondent-appellant, et al., respondent. (Proceeding No. 5) In the Matter of Desiree S. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Derek S. (Anonymous), respondent-appellant, et al., respondent. (Proceeding No. 6) In the Matter of Dominque B. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Derek S. (Anonymous), respondent-appellant, et al., respondent. (Proceeding No. 7) In the Matter of Shameek S. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Derek S. (Anonymous), respondent-appellant, et al., respondent. (Proceeding No. 8).
Lauren Shapiro, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Ballard Spahr Stillman & Friedman LLP [Scott M. Himes], of counsel), for respondent-appellant. Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Richard Dearing and Julie Steiner of counsel), for petitioner-respondent.
Lauren Shapiro, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Ballard Spahr Stillman & Friedman LLP [Scott M. Himes], of counsel), for respondent-appellant. Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Richard Dearing and Julie Steiner of counsel), for petitioner-respondent.
Seymour W. James, Jr., New York, N.Y. (Tamara A. Steckler and Patricia Colella of counsel), attorney for the children.
Appeal from an order of fact-finding and disposition of the Family Court, Kings County (Lillian Wan, J.), dated September 10, 2013. The order, insofar as appealed from, after fact-finding and dispositional hearings, directed the father to undergo a mental health evaluation.
ORDERED that the order of fact finding and disposition is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
At a dispositional hearing in a neglect proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, “[t]he paramount concern ... is the best interests of the child [ren]” (Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. of City of N.Y. v. Leona W., 192 A.D.2d 602, 603, 596 N.Y.S.2d 141; see Matter of Phillips N. [Joy N.], 104 A.D.3d 690, 691, 961 N.Y.S.2d 216). The factors to be considered in making the determination include the parent's “capacity to properly supervise the child[ren], based on current information” and “the potential threat of future ... neglect” (Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. of City of N.Y. v. Leona W., 192 A.D.2d at 603, 596 N.Y.S.2d 141; see Matter of Eric Z. [Guang Z.], 100 A.D.3d 646, 648, 953 N.Y.S.2d 644). Here, it was in the children's best interests for the Family Court to direct the father to undergo a mental health evaluation ( see Matter of Salvatore M. [Nicole M.], 104 A.D.3d 769, 770, 961 N.Y.S.2d 292; Matter of Jamarra S. [Jessica S.], 85 A.D.3d 803, 805, 925 N.Y.S.2d 531).
The father's remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit. LEVENTHAL, J.P., HALL, AUSTIN and MALTESE, JJ., concur.