In re Damon S.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Damon S.

185 A.D.2d 850, 587 N.Y.S.2d 355, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9890

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedAugust 10, 1992

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 185 A.D.2d 850 (In re Damon S.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Damon S., 185 A.D.2d 850, 587 N.Y.S.2d 355, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9890 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

—In two related child neglect proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the Law Guardian for the children appeals from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (McNulty, J.), entered June 21, 1991, which, after a fact-finding hearing, found no evidence of neglect and dismissed the petitions.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

We agree that the petitioner did not establish by a fair preponderance of the credible evidence that the subject children, ages 14 and 16, respectively, were neglected within the meaning of Family Court Act § 1012. Among other things, the allegations of excessive corporal punishment were not supported by physical evidence (see, Matter of Coleen P., 148 AD2d 782, 784). Moreover, although the children lived under strict household rules, we find that the punishments they received for failure to do their chores were reasonable in that they were for the "training or education” of the children and for the "preservation of discipline” (see, Matter of Rodney C., 91 Misc 2d 677, 681). The record shows that the children had almost perfect school attendance and their alleged poor perfor[851]*851manee in school did not establish neglect in this case (cf., Matter of Jovann B., 153 AD2d 858, 859). Bracken, J. P., Sullivan, Rosenblatt and Lawrence, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—In two related child neglect proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the Law Guardian for the children appeals from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (McNulty, J.), entered June 21, 1991, which, after a fact-finding hearing, found no evidence of neglect and dismissed the petitions.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

We agree that the petitioner did not establish by a fair preponderance of the credible evidence that the subject children, ages 14 and 16, respectively, were neglected within the meaning of Family Court Act § 1012. Among other things, the allegations of excessive corporal punishment were not supported by physical evidence (see, Matter of Coleen P., 148 AD2d 782, 784). Moreover, although the children lived under strict household rules, we find that the punishments they received for failure to do their chores were reasonable in that they were for the "training or education” of the children and for the "preservation of discipline” (see, Matter of Rodney C., 91 Misc 2d 677, 681). The record shows that the children had almost perfect school attendance and their alleged poor perfor[851]*851manee in school did not establish neglect in this case (cf., Matter of Jovann B., 153 AD2d 858, 859). Bracken, J. P., Sullivan, Rosenblatt and Lawrence, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

185 A.D.2d 850, 587 N.Y.S.2d 355, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9890, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-damon-s-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack