Opinion
CAF 01-02272
May 2, 2003.
Appeal from an order of Family Court, Oneida County (Cook, J.), entered July 31, 2001, which placed the child in the custody of petitioner for a period of 11 months and directed respondent to follow certain terms and conditions.
PETER J. DI GIORGIO, JR., UTICA, FOR RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.
JOHN A. HERBOWY, UTICA, FOR PETITIONER-RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: GREEN, J.P., WISNER, SCUDDER, KEHOE, AND GORSKI, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum:
Family Court's finding pursuant to Family Ct Act 1012(f)(i)(B) that respondent's child is neglected under the imminent danger standard is supported by a preponderance of the evidence ( see generally Matter of Linda K., 132 A.D.2d 149, 154-155, lv denied 70 N.Y.2d 616). Contrary to respondent's contention, "a finding of neglect [under the imminent danger standard] may be appropriate even when a child has not been actually impaired, in order to protect that child and prevent impairment" ( Matter of Nassau County Dept. of Social Servs v. Denise J., 87 N.Y.2d 73, 79). Additionally, respondent contends that the court's findings exceed the scope of the petition, which was not amended ( see Family Ct Act 1012 [h]). We conclude, however, that any error is harmless inasmuch as the court's findings that are within the scope of the petition otherwise support the finding of neglect ( see Matter of Michael G., 300 A.D.2d 1144; Matter of Lisa Z., 278 A.D.2d 674).