| Matter of Brian R. |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 01356 [48 AD3d 576] |
| February 13, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Brian R., a Child Alleged to be Neglected.Westchester County Department of Social Services, Respondent; Jose R., Appellant, et al.,Respondent. (Proceeding No. 1.) In the Matter of Jose M., a Child Alleged to be Neglected.Westchester County Department of Social Services, Respondent; Jose R., Appellant, et al.,Respondent. (Proceeding No. 2.) In the Matter of Leidy M., a Child Alleged to be Neglected.Westchester County Department of Social Services, Respondent; Jose R., Appellant, et al.,Respondent. (Proceeding No. 3.) In the Matter of Zuriday M., a Child Alleged to be Neglected.Westchester County Department of Social Services, Respondent; Jose R., Appellant, et al.,Respondent. (Proceeding No. 4.) |
—[*1] Charlene M. Indelicato, County Attorney, White Plains, N.Y. (Stacey Dolgin-Kmetz and[*2]Brendan J. McGrath of counsel), forpetitioner-respondent.
In four related child abuse and neglect proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10,the father appeals from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Westchester County (Klein,J.), entered September 20, 2006, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court enteredDecember 16, 2005, made after a hearing, finding that he had neglected the subject children,released the children, upon consent, to the custody of the mother under the supervision of theWestchester County Department of Social Services for a period of one year.
Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order of disposition as released the subjectchildren, upon consent, to the custody of the mother under the supervision of the WestchesterCounty Department of Social Services for a period of one year is dismissed, without costs ordisbursements; and it is further,
Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs ordisbursements.
The appeal from so much of the order of disposition as released the subject children, uponconsent, to the custody of the mother under the supervision of the Westchester CountyDepartment of Social Services for a period of one year must be dismissed, as no appeal lies froman order entered upon the consent of the appealing party (see Matter of Angelique L., 42 AD3d 569, 571 [2007]; Matter of Jerome Marcel T., 28 AD3d780, 781 [2006]). Moreover, that portion of the order of disposition has been renderedacademic, as it has expired by its own terms (see Matter of Derek P., 43 AD3d 938 [2007]; Matter ofAngelique L., 42 AD3d at 571).
However, since the adjudication of neglect "constitutes a permanent and significant stigmawhich might indirectly affect the [father's] status in future proceedings" (Matter of Jason Brian B., 33 AD3d995 [2006]), the appeal from the portion of the order of disposition which brings up forreview the finding of neglect is not academic (see Matter of Daqwuan G., 29 AD3d 694, 695 [2006]). Here, theFamily Court's finding of neglect is supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see Matter of Aminat O., 20 AD3d480, 481 [2005]; Matter of Griselua A., 304 AD2d 659, 660 [2003]; Matter ofEdward C.L., 292 AD2d 282, 283 [2002]). Accordingly, the Family Court's determination isaffirmed.
The father's remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review, are without merit, ordo not require reversal. Ritter, J.P., Santucci, Covello and Carni, JJ., concur.