Opinion
2013-11519 (Docket Nos. N-23069-12, N-23070-12)
03-25-2015
In the Matter of HONESTI H. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Ted H. (Anonymous), respondent-appellant, et al., respondent. (Proceeding No. 1). In the Matter of Nazari H. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, petitioner-respondent; Ted H. (Anonymous), respondent-appellant, et al., respondent. (Proceeding No. 2).
Aiello & Cannick, Maspeth, N.Y. (Jennifer Arditi of counsel), for respondent-appellant. Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Francis Caputo and Jane L. Gordon of counsel), for petitioner-respondent. Seymour W. James, Jr., New York, N.Y. (Tamara A. Steckler and Susan Clement of counsel), attorney for the children.
Aiello & Cannick, Maspeth, N.Y. (Jennifer Arditi of counsel), for respondent-appellant.
Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Francis Caputo and Jane L. Gordon of counsel), for petitioner-respondent.
Seymour W. James, Jr., New York, N.Y. (Tamara A. Steckler and Susan Clement of counsel), attorney for the children.
RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P., LEONARD B. AUSTIN, SANDRA L. SGROI, and HECTOR D. LASALLE, JJ.
Opinion Appeal from an order of fact-finding of the Family Court, Queens County (Mary R. O'Donoghue, J.), dated November 18, 2013. The order, insofar as appealed from, after a fact-finding hearing, found that the father neglected the subject children.
ORDERED that the order of fact-finding is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
Contrary to the father's contention, the Family Court's determination that he neglected the subject children was supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see Family Ct. Act §§ 1012[f][i] ; 1046[b][i] ). The evidence adduced at the hearing established that the father and the mother of the subject children engaged in acts of domestic violence against each other while the children were nearby (see Matter of Carmine G. [Franklin G. ], 115 A.D.3d 594, 982 N.Y.S.2d 318 ). Based upon this evidence, as well as upon the combination of circumstances revealed in the record, including the father's admitted encouragement of the mother's illegal drug use while she was pregnant, and the adverse inference correctly made against the father based upon his failure to testify, the Family Court properly determined that the petitioner established the father's neglect by a preponderance of the evidence (see Matter of Mohammed J. [Mohammed Z. ], 121 A.D.3d 994, 994, 995 N.Y.S.2d 126 ; Matter of Rosy S. [Ivelisse T. ], 54 A.D.3d 377, 863 N.Y.S.2d 65 ; Matter of Harmony S., 22 A.D.3d 972, 802 N.Y.S.2d 784 ).
The father's contention concerning the inadmissibility of the evidence of the alleged domestic violence is without merit (see Matter of Isaiah R., 35 A.D.3d 249, 825 N.Y.S.2d 218 ).