Matter of Brian R.
2008 NY Slip Op 01355 [48 AD3d 575]
February 13, 2008
Appellate Division, Second Department
As corrected through Wednesday, April 16, 2008


In the Matter of Brian R. Westchester County Department of SocialServices, Respondent; Dalila G.-A. et al., Respondents. J. Henry Neale, Jr., Nonparty Appellant.(Proceeding No. 1.) In the Matter of Jose M. Westchester County Department of Social Services,Respondent; Dalila G.-A. et al., Respondents. J. Henry Neale, Jr., Nonparty Appellant.(Proceeding No. 2.) In the Matter of Leidy M. Westchester County Department of SocialServices, Respondent; Dalila G.-A. et al., Respondents. J. Henry Neale, Jr., Nonparty Appellant.(Proceeding No. 3.) In the Matter of Zuriday M. Westchester County Department of SocialServices, Respondent; Dalila G.-A. et al., Respondents. J. Henry Neale, Jr., Nonparty Appellant.(Proceeding No. 4.)

[*1]J. Henry Neale, Jr., White Plains, N.Y., nonparty appellant pro se.

Charlene M. Indelicato, County Attorney, White Plains, N.Y. (Stacey Dolgin-Kmetz andLeah R. Pizer of counsel), for respondent.

Rosalie C. Leslie, White Plains, N.Y., Law Guardian.

In four related child abuse and neglect proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 10,nonparty J. Henry Neale, Jr., appeals from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County(Klein, J.), entered March 23, 2006, which denied his motion to vacate his disqualification ascounsel for the father.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The disqualification of an attorney is a matter resting within the sound discretion of the court(see Matter of Marvin Q., 45 AD3d852 [2007]). "Although '[a] party's entitlement to be represented in ongoing litigation bycounsel of his or her own choosing is a valued right which should not be abridged,' such rightwill not supersede a clear showing that disqualification is warranted" (Matter of Marvin Q., 45 AD3d852, 853 [2007], quoting Campolongo v Campolongo, 2 AD3d 476 [2003]). Here, thenonparty appellant, who represented the father in this neglect proceeding, communicated withone of the subject children, and used her as an interpreter when speaking with the parties, withoutthe knowledge and consent of the Law Guardian (see Code of Professional ResponsibilityDR 7-104 [a] [1] [22 NYCRR 1200.35 (a) (1)]). Under such circumstances, there was a clearshowing that disqualification was warranted (see Matter of Marvin Q., 45 AD3d 852 [2007]; Matter of Carey v Carey, 13 AD3d1011, 1012 [2004]; Campolongo vCampolongo, 2 AD3d 476 [2003]). Accordingly, the Family Court providentlyexercised its discretion in denying the nonparty appellant's motion to vacate his disqualificationas counsel for the father. Ritter, J.P., Santucci, Covello and Carni, JJ., concur.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.