| Matter of Briana F. (Oswaldo F.) |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 00257 [69 AD3d 718] |
| January 12, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Briana F., an Infant. Suffolk County Department ofSocial Services, Respondent; Oswaldo F., Appellant. (Proceeding No. 1.) In the Matter ofMatthew F., an Infant. Suffolk County Department of Social Services, Respondent; Oswaldo F.,Appellant. (Proceeding No. 2.) |
—[*1] Christine Malafi, County Attorney, Central Islip, N.Y. (Randall J. Ratje of counsel), forrespondent.
In two related child protective proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, thefather appeals (1) from a decision of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Whelan, J.), datedDecember 23, 2008, and (2), as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of fact-finding anddisposition of the same court dated March 17, 2009, as, upon the decision, made afterfact-finding and dispositional hearings, found that he neglected the child Matthew F. andderivatively neglected the child Briana F., and directed that he undergo mental health andsubstance abuse evaluations.
Ordered that the appeal from the decision is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as noappeal lies from a decision (see Family Ct Act § 1112 [a]; Schicchi v J.A.Green Constr. Corp., 100 AD2d 509 [1984]); and it is further,
Ordered that the order of fact-finding and disposition is affirmed insofar as appealed from,without costs or disbursements.
"In a child protective proceeding, the party seeking to establish neglect must show, 'first, thata child's physical, mental or emotional condition has been impaired or is in imminent danger ofbecoming impaired and second, that the actual or threatened harm to the child is a consequenceof the failure of the parent or caretaker to exercise a minimum degree of care in providing thechild with proper supervision or guardianship' " (Matter of Tajani B., 49 AD3d 876, 876 [2008], quoting Nicholson v Scoppetta, 3 NY3d357, 368 [2004]).[*2]
Here, the petitioner proved by a preponderance of theevidence that the father neglected the child Matthew F. The evidence presented at thefact-finding hearing was sufficient to show that the father committed an act of domestic violenceduring which he demanded that Matthew get him a knife and then held the knife to the mother'sthroat in Matthew's presence, thereby impairing, or creating an imminent danger of impairing,Matthew's physical, emotional, and mental conditions (see Matter of Jordan E., 57 AD3d 539, 540 [2008]; Matter of Andrew Y., 44 AD3d1063, 1064 [2007]; Matter of Tami G., 209 AD2d 869, 870 [1994]). The evidencealso supports a finding of derivative neglect with respect to the child Briana F. (see Matter ofCybill V., 279 AD2d 582, 583 [2001]; Matter of Deandre T., 253 AD2d 497, 498[1998]).
Contrary to the father's contention, the Family Court properly directed that he undergomental health and substance abuse evaluations (see Matter of Joseph S., 63 AD3d 850 [2009]).
The father's remaining contentions are without merit. Skelos, J.P., Dickerson, Lott andRoman, JJ., concur.