From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Sophia S.

Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department
Jun 30, 2021
No. 2020-06326 (N.Y. App. Div. Jun. 30, 2021)

Opinion

2021-04141 N-17522-19 N-17523-19

06-30-2021

In the Matter of Sophia S. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, respondent; Robert S. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Olivia S. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, respondent; Robert S. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 2)

Angella S. Hull, Jamaica, NY, for appellant. Georgia M. Pestana, Acting Corporation Counsel, New York, NY (Devin Slack and Cynthia Kao of counsel), for respondent. Mindy L. Gress, Brooklyn, NY, attorney for the child Sophia S. Karen P. Simmons, Brooklyn, NY (Chai Park and Janet Neustaetter of counsel), attorney for the child Olivia S.


Angella S. Hull, Jamaica, NY, for appellant.

Georgia M. Pestana, Acting Corporation Counsel, New York, NY (Devin Slack and Cynthia Kao of counsel), for respondent.

Mindy L. Gress, Brooklyn, NY, attorney for the child Sophia S.

Karen P. Simmons, Brooklyn, NY (Chai Park and Janet Neustaetter of counsel), attorney for the child Olivia S.

CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, J.P., ROBERT J. MILLER, BETSY BARROS, ANGELA G. IANNACCI, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

In related proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Erik S. Pitchal, J.), dated July 30, 2020. The order denied the father's motion, in effect, to vacate an order of fact-finding of the same court dated January 16, 2020, which, upon his failure to appear at a fact-finding hearing, and after an inquest, found that he neglected the subject children.

ORDERED that the order dated July 30, 2020, is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The petitioner commenced these proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, alleging that the father neglected the subject children. In an order of fact-finding dated January 16, 2020, the Family Court, upon the father's default in appearing at the fact-finding hearing, found that the father neglected the children. The court thereafter issued an order of disposition dated February 7, 2020. The father then moved, in effect, to vacate the order of fact-finding. The court denied the motion, and the father appeals.

If the parent or other person legally responsible for the children's care is not present, the court may proceed to hear a petition pursuant to Family Court Act article 10 if the children are represented by counsel (see Family Ct Act § 1042; Matter of Keith A.H. [Andrew H.], 180 A.D.3d 902, 903). "However, a timely motion to vacate the resulting fact-finding order shall be granted upon an affidavit showing, inter alia, a potentially meritorious defense to the petition, unless the court finds that the parent or other person legally responsible for the child's care willfully refused to appear at the hearing" (Matter of Keith A.H. [Andrew H.], 180 A.D.3d at 903-904; see Family Ct Act § 1042).

Here, the Family Court properly denied the father's motion, in effect, to vacate the order of fact-finding. The father's conclusory affidavit was insufficient to establish a potentially meritorious defense to the allegations in the petitions (see Matter of Keith A.H. [Andrew H.], 180 A.D.3d at 904; Matter of Jalaysia S. [Joshua S.], 169 A.D.3d 695, 696). In addition, the record supports the court's determination that the father willfully refused to appear at the fact-finding hearing (see Matter of Samantha P. [William C.], 127 A.D.3d 1094, 1095; Matter of Christian T., 12 A.D.3d 613, 613). The court informed the father that it may proceed if he failed to appear, an advisement akin to Parker warnings in criminal matters (see People v Parker, 57 N.Y.2d 136; Matter of Elizabeth T. [Leonard T.], 3 A.D.3d 751, 752-753), yet the father failed to appear at the fact-finding hearing. Despite the court's admonishment, the father also did not attempt to contact his counsel or the court to find out the date of the fact-finding hearing (see Matter of Michael O.F. [Fausat O.], 119 A.D.3d 785, 786; Matter of Nicholas S., 46 A.D.3d 830, 831; Matter of Christian T., 12 A.D.3d at 613).

CHAMBERS, J.P., MILLER, BARROS and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

In re Sophia S.

Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department
Jun 30, 2021
No. 2020-06326 (N.Y. App. Div. Jun. 30, 2021)
Case details for

In re Sophia S.

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Sophia S. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's…

Court:Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department

Date published: Jun 30, 2021

Citations

No. 2020-06326 (N.Y. App. Div. Jun. 30, 2021)