| Matter of Renee R. (Tonya D.) |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 06218 [98 AD3d 1048] |
| September 19, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Renee R., an Infant. Orange County Department ofSocial Services, Respondent; Tonya D. et al., Appellants. |
—[*1] Mark Diamond, New York, N.Y., for appellant Christian R. David L. Darwin, County Attorney, Goshen, N.Y. (Stephen Toole of counsel), forrespondent. Jessica Bacal, Katonah, N.Y., attorney for the child.
In a child protective proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the mother appeals,as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of fact-finding and disposition of the FamilyCourt, Orange County (Bivona, J.), dated April 25, 2011, as, after a hearing, found that sheneglected the subject child and placed her under the supervision of the Orange CountyDepartment of Social Services, pursuant to stated terms and conditions, for a period of 12months, and the father separately appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of the same orderas found that he neglected the subject child and placed him under the supervision of the OrangeCounty Department of Social Services, pursuant to stated terms and conditions, for a period of 12months.
Ordered that the appeals from so much of the order of fact-finding and disposition as placedthe mother and the father under the supervision of the Orange County Department of SocialServices, pursuant to stated terms and conditions, for a period of 12 months are dismissed asacademic, without costs or disbursements, as those portions of the order expired by their ownterms; and it is further,
Ordered that the order of fact-finding and disposition is affirmed insofar as reviewed, withoutcosts or disbursements.
Contrary to the appellants' contentions, the Family Court's finding of neglect as to the subjectchild is supported by a preponderance of the evidence with respect to each parent (seeFamily Ct Act §§ 1012 [f] [i] [B]; 1046 [b] [i]). The nonhearsay evidence submittedat the fact-finding hearing established that neither parent was capable of providing basic care forthe subject child, a newborn at the time this proceeding was commenced, and that they each hadacknowledged as much to a caseworker at the hospital. Furthermore, the Family Court wasentitled to draw a negative [*2]inference against the father basedupon his failure to testify at the fact-finding hearing (see Matter of Nassau County Dept. ofSocial Servs. v Denise J., 87 NY2d 73, 79 [1995]; Matter of Delehia J. [Tameka J.], 93 AD3d 668, 670 [2012]; Matter of Zaire D. [Benellie R.], 90AD3d 923, 923 [2011]).
The remaining contentions of the mother, the father, and the attorney for the child are eitherimproperly raised for the first time on appeal or without merit. Rivera, J.P., Dickerson, Hall andCohen, JJ., concur.