In the Matter of Lee P

2 Citing cases

  1. Western v. Josephine F.

    126 A.D.3d 605 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)   Cited 7 times

    The court properly denied the mother's motion to vacate, as the record supports the court's finding that the mother willfully defaulted at the consolidated hearing on the custody petition and the dispositional phase of the neglect petition ( seeFamily Ct. Act §§ 1042, 1055–b; see also Matter of Rozelle Tyrone Lee P., 19 A.D.3d 237, 238, 798 N.Y.S.2d 9 [1st Dept.2005], lv. dismissed5 N.Y.3d 839, 805 N.Y.S.2d 542, 839 N.E.2d 895 [2005] ). The mother failed to explain in her motion papers why she stormed out of the courtroom and refused to participate in the proceedings ( see Rozelle, 19 A.D.3d at 238, 798 N.Y.S.2d 9).

  2. Jose P.V. v. Admin for Children's Services (In re Yecllyne P.H.)

    117 A.D.3d 438 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)   Cited 1 times

    The court properly determined that respondent's excuse was invalid, especially given his failure to appear or contact the court until nearly a year after the petition was filed. Moreover, the respondent's several prior unexplained absences from court proceedings supports a finding of willful default ( see Matter of Rozelle Tyrone Lee P., 19 A.D.3d 237, 798 N.Y.S.2d 9 [1st Dept.2005],lv. dismissed5 N.Y.3d 839, 805 N.Y.S.2d 542, 839 N.E.2d 895 [2005] ). While respondent's willful default alone warranted denial of the motion, we further note that respondent failed to establish any meritorious defense to the allegations of neglect based on the children's exposure to acts of domestic violence between the parents ( seeFamily Ct. Act §§ 1012[f][i] [B], 1042; Matter of Lonell J., 242 A.D.2d 58, 60–61, 673 N.Y.S.2d 116 [1st Dept.1998] ). Respondent failed to dispute or address at least two incidents described in the petition, in domestic incident reports, and by the mother at the hearing.