| Matter of Erica B. (Quentin B.) |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 08851 [79 AD3d 415] |
| December 2, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| In the Matter of Erica B. and Another, Children Alleged to be Neglected.Quentin B., Appellant; Administration for Children's Services,Respondent. |
—[*1] Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Scott Shorr of counsel), for respondent. Tamara A. Steckler, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Selene D'Alessio of counsel), LawGuardian.
Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Monica Drinane, J.), entered on or about April 30, 2009,which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, determined, after a fact-finding hearing, thatrespondent father neglected the subject children, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal fromorder of disposition, same court and Judge, entered on or about May 27, 2009, which, upon afact-finding of neglect, inter alia, placed the children in foster care with the Administration for Children'sServices, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as abandoned.
The father contends that the court lacked jurisdiction over him because he did not have custody ofthe children and was barred from contact with them by an order of protection. However, in determiningjurisdiction of the Family Court under Family Court Act article 10, the child need not currently be in thecare or custody of the respondent, if the court otherwise has jurisdiction over the matter (seeFamily Ct Act § 1013 [d]). A respondent in a neglect proceeding includes any parent orother person legally responsible for the child's care (see Family Ct Act § 1012 [a]). Aparent may not avoid his responsibilities to his children merely because they are not in his custody(see Matter of Brent HH., 309 AD2d 1016, 1017 [2003], lv denied 1 NY3d 506[2004]).
The court properly concluded that the father was aware that the mother was not properly caring forthe children based on his testimony that he traveled to Puerto Rico to get one of the children when hewas informed that the child was not attending school for a couple of months, and based on thechildren's testimony that he was present when they visited their paternal grandparent. Neglect mayinclude the failure to properly supervise by unreasonably allowing harm to be inflicted on a child(see Matter of Alena O., 220 AD2d 358, 361 [1995]). The fact that the father was barredfrom contact with the children did not relieve him of his parental [*2]duties. Concur—Tom, J.P., Friedman, DeGrasse, Freedman andManzanet-Daniels, JJ.