Opinion
April 1, 1996
Appeal from the Family Court, Kings County (Pearce, J.).
Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order of disposition as placed the children in the care of the Commissioner of Social Services is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,
Ordered that, on the appeal from the order of disposition, the fact-finding order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,
Ordered that the appeal from the order of disposition is otherwise dismissed, without costs or disbursements.
The appeal from the order of disposition must be dismissed as academic because the one-year placement period has expired and no appeal has been taken from a subsequent order extending placement ( see, Matter of Eddie E., 219 A.D.2d 719; Matter of Angelina E., 213 A.D.2d 346; Matter of Tanya M., 207 A.D.2d 656; Matter of Byron A., 112 A.D.2d 30).
However, the underlying finding of abuse is a permanent and significant stigma, and it might indirectly affect the appellant's status in potential future proceedings. Therefore, the issue of whether the appellant abused her children is not academic ( see, Matter of H. Children, 156 A.D.2d 520).
Contrary to the appellant's contention, the petitioner proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the children had been abused within the meaning of Family Court Act § 1046 ( see, Matter of Nicole V., 71 N.Y.2d 112; Matter of Lauren B., 200 A.D.2d 740; Matter of Dutchess County [Douglas E., III] v. Douglas E., Jr., 191 A.D.2d 694). Bracken, J.P., Rosenblatt, O'Brien and Goldstein, JJ., concur.