| Matter of Yanni D. (Hope J.) |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 04163 [95 AD3d 1313] |
| May 30, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Yanni D. Administration for Children's Services,Respondent. Hope J., Appellant. (Proceeding No. 1.) In the Matter of Rudolph A.H.Administration for Children's Services, Respondent;Hope J., Appellant. (Proceeding No. 2.) |
—[*1] Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Francis F. Caputo andElizabeth I. Freedman of counsel; Daniel A. Pollak on the brief), for respondent. Richard Giacoma, Jamaica, N.Y., attorney for the child Yanni D. Steven Banks, New York, N.Y. (Tamara A. Steckler and John A. Newbery of counsel),attorney for the child Rudolph A. H.
In two related child protective proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, themother appeals from an order of fact-finding of the Family Court, Queens County (Tally, J.),dated August 17, 2011, which, after a hearing, found that she had neglected the child RudolphA.H. and derivatively neglected the child Yanni D.
Ordered that the order of fact-finding is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
After a fact-finding hearing under Family Court Act article 10, any determination that a childis abused or neglected must be based on a preponderance of the evidence (see Family CtAct § 1046 [b]; Matter of Nicole V., 71 NY2d 112, 117 [1987]; Matter ofDareth O., 304 AD2d 667, 668 [2003]). Neglect may be established by even a single incidentof excessive corporal punishment (seeMatter of Padmine M. [Sandra M.], 84 AD3d 806, 807 [2011]; Matter of Rachel H., 60 AD3d1060 [2009]). The Family Court's assessment of the credibility of witnesses is entitled toconsiderable deference (see Matter of Irene O., 38 NY2d 776 [1975]; Matter of Sadiq H. [Karl H.], 81 AD3d647 [2011]).
Here, contrary to the mother's contention, the Family Court's finding of neglect of [*2]the child Rudolph A.H. based on excessive corporal punishmentwas supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see Family Ct Act § 1012 [f][i] [B]; Matter of James S. [KathleenS.], 88 AD3d 1006 [2011]; Matter of Padmine M. [Sandra M.], 84 AD3d 806 [2011]; Matter of Sadiq H. [Karl H.], 81 AD3d647 [2011]; Matter of Isaiah S.,63 AD3d 948 [2009]; Matter ofDerek J., 56 AD3d 558 [2008]). The Family Court's finding that the mother engaged inexcessive corporal punishment when she initiated an altercation in which she slapped andscratched Rudolph A.H. is supported by the evidence presented at the fact-finding hearing,including testimony of a caseworker and a police officer, and a nurse's report describing thechild's injuries.
The evidence also supported the derivative finding of neglect as to the child Yanni D. (see Matter of James S. [Kathleen S.],88 AD3d 1006 [2011]; Matter of Isaiah S., 63 AD3d at 949; Matter of Jordan W., 59 AD3d558 [2009]; Matter of DevontayM., 56 AD3d 561, 562 [2008]). Dillon, J.P., Leventhal, Hall and Austin, JJ., concur.