| Matter of Assatta N.P. (Nelson L.) |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 01608 [92 AD3d 945] |
| February 28, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Assatta N.P. Nassau County Department of SocialServices, Respondent; Nelson L., Jr., Appellant. |
—[*1]
John Ciampoli, County Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Robert F. Van der Waag of counsel), forrespondent. Marjorie G. Adler, Garden City, N.Y., attorney for the child.
In a child protective proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the father appealsfrom an order of fact-finding and disposition of the Family Court, Nassau County (Greenberg,J.), dated January 13, 2011, which granted the petitioner's motion for summary judgment findingthat he had severely abused the subject child and adjudged that he had severely abused thesubject child.
Ordered that the order of fact-finding and disposition is affirmed, without costs ordisbursements.
The father's contention that his due process rights were violated because the Family Courtaddressed the petitioner's motion for summary judgment in his absence is without merit. "Whiledue process of law applies in Family [Court] Act article 10 proceedings and includes the right ofa parent to be present at every stage of the proceedings, that right is not absolute" (Matter ofElizabeth T. [Leonard T.], 3 AD3d 751, 753 [2004]; see Matter of Lillian D.L., 29 AD3d 583 [2006]; Matter ofQ.-L.H., 27 AD3d 738 [2006]; Matter of James Carton K., 245 AD2d 374, 377[1997]). Here, balancing the due process rights of the father with the respective rights and"mental and emotional well being of the child," the Family Court did not improvidently exerciseits discretion in entertaining the motion in the father's absence (Matter of Q.-L.H., 27AD3d at 739; see Family Ct Act § 1042; Matter of Lillian D.L., 29 AD3dat 584). In addition, the father was not deprived of the effective assistance of counsel, as counselis not ineffective for "fail[ing] to make a motion or argument that has little or no chance ofsuccess" (People v Caban, 5 NY3d143, 152 [2005] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v Padgett, 87 AD3d 1166, 1167 [2011]; Matter of Ruvolo v Herrera, 62 AD3d1012 [2009]; Matter of Alfred C., 237 AD2d 517 [1997]). Skelos, J.P., Dickerson,Eng and Sgroi, JJ., concur.