Opinion
2013-02-27
In the Matter of MICHAEL G.C. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner–respondent; Michael C. (Anonymous), Sr., appellant, et al., respondent.
Mark Brandys, New York, N.Y., for appellant. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Francis F. Caputo and Elizabeth I. Freedman of counsel; Daniel H. Fishman on the brief), for respondent.
Mark Brandys, New York, N.Y., for appellant. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Francis F. Caputo and Elizabeth I. Freedman of counsel; Daniel H. Fishman on the brief), for respondent.
Steven Banks, New York, N.Y. (Tamara A. Steckler and Judith Stern of counsel), attorney for the child.
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, L. PRISCILLA HALL, and ROBERT J. MILLER, JJ.
In a child protective proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the father appeals from an order of fact-finding and disposition of the Family Court, Kings County (White, J.), dated December 13, 2011, which, after fact-finding and dispositional hearings, inter alia, determined that he neglected the subject child.
ORDERED that the order of fact-finding and disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
“To establish neglect pursuant to section 1012(f)(i)(B) of the Family Court Act, the petitioner must prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that (1) the child's physical, mental, or emotional condition has been impaired, or is in imminent danger of becoming impaired, and (2) the actual or threatened harm to the child is due to the failure of the parent or caretaker to exercise a minimum degree of care in providing the child with proper supervision or guardianship” (Matter of Kiara C. [ David C.], 85 A.D.3d 1025, 1025–1026, 926 N.Y.S.2d 566;see Nicholson v. Scoppetta, 3 N.Y.3d 357, 368, 787 N.Y.S.2d 196, 820 N.E.2d 840).
Here, contrary to the father's contention, a preponderance of the evidence established that he neglected the subject child, inter alia, by engaging in an act of domestic violence against the mother in the child's presence that created an imminent danger of impairing the child's physical, mental, or emotional condition ( seeFamily Ct. Act § 1012[f][i][B]; Matter of Kiara C. [ David C.], 85 A.D.3d at 1026, 926 N.Y.S.2d 566;Matter of Elijah J. [ Phillip J.], 77 A.D.3d 835, 909 N.Y.S.2d 375;Matter of Briana F. [ Oswaldo F.], 69 A.D.3d 718, 892 N.Y.S.2d 526;Matter of Jordan E., 57 A.D.3d 539, 869 N.Y.S.2d 162;Matter of Andrew Y., 44 A.D.3d 1063, 844 N.Y.S.2d 408;Matter of Jayda D.-B., 33 A.D.3d 998, 822 N.Y.S.2d 723;cf. Nicholson v. Scoppetta, 3 N.Y.3d 357, 787 N.Y.S.2d 196, 820 N.E.2d 840).