Opinion
694 CAF 17–01838
06-28-2019
In the MATTER OF ALANA G., Aiden D., Ashton D., Cameron C., and Jaide C. Erie County Department of Social Services, Petitioner–Respondent; v. Danielle I., Respondent–Appellant.
WILLIAM D. BRODERICK, JR., ELMA, FOR RESPONDENT–APPELLANT. NICHOLAS G. LOCICERO, BUFFALO, FOR PETITIONER–RESPONDENT. JAMES A. KREUZER, BUFFALO, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILDREN.
WILLIAM D. BRODERICK, JR., ELMA, FOR RESPONDENT–APPELLANT.
NICHOLAS G. LOCICERO, BUFFALO, FOR PETITIONER–RESPONDENT.
JAMES A. KREUZER, BUFFALO, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILDREN.
PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., LINDLEY, NEMOYER, TROUTMAN, AND WINSLOW, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: In this proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, respondent mother appeals from a fact-finding and dispositional order that, inter alia, adjudged that she neglected her five children. Initially, we reject the mother's contention that the petitions that originated this proceeding were invalid inasmuch as they were not properly verified. Contrary to the mother's contention, petitions in neglect proceedings need not be verified (see Family Ct. Act § 1031 ; Merril Sobie, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 29A, Family Ct. Act § 1031 at 290 [2010 ed]; see also Mamoon v. Dot Net Inc. , 135 A.D.3d 656, 657, 25 N.Y.S.3d 85 [1st Dept. 2016] ; see generally Family Ct. Act § 165[a] ). The mother failed to preserve her contention that Family Court improperly admitted in evidence, without a proper foundation, the children's school records (see Matter of Shirley A.S. [David A.S.] , 90 A.D.3d 1655, 1655, 936 N.Y.S.2d 825 [4th Dept. 2011], lv denied 18 N.Y.3d 811, 2012 WL 1432199 [2012] ). Indeed, the mother's attorney conceded that the records were properly admitted. In any event, we conclude that any error in admitting the records was harmless. Most of the information contained therein, including that regarding attendance and behavioral issues, was cumulative of testimony given by school social workers (see Matter of Ezekiel C. , 12 A.D.3d 333, 334, 785 N.Y.S.2d 79 [1st Dept. 2004] ), and the court expressly noted that its finding of neglect was not based on educational neglect. Thus, the result would have been the same even if the school records had been excluded (see Matter of Kyla E. [Stephanie F.] , 126 A.D.3d 1385, 1386, 5 N.Y.S.3d 660 [4th Dept. 2015], lv denied 25 N.Y.3d 910, 2015 WL 3605100 [2015] ).