In re Errol S.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Errol S.

66 A.D.2d 579, 886 N.Y.S.2d 604

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

DecidedOctober 27, 2009

StatusPublished

This text of 66 A.D.2d 579 (In re Errol 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 Errol S., 66 A.D.2d 579, 886 N.Y.S.2d 604 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Clark V Richardson, J.), entered on or about June 25, 2008, which, upon a finding that respondent father neglected the subject children, released the children to their mother and permitted weekly visits between respondent and the children, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The finding of neglect was supported by a preponderance of the evidence, including testimony that respondent committed acts of domestic violence against the mother often in the children’s presence (Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i] [B]). These violent acts, including threatening the mother with a firearm, which was witnessed by one of the children while the other child slept nearby, exposed the children to an imminent risk of harm (see Matter of Elijah C., 49 AD3d 340 [2008]; Matter of Andrew Y., 44 AD3d 1063, 1064 [2007]), and there exists no basis to disturb the court’s credibility determinations (see Matter of Irene O., 38 NY2d 776 [1975]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Moskowitz, Renwick and Richter, JJ.

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

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Clark V Richardson, J.), entered on or about June 25, 2008, which, upon a finding that respondent father neglected the subject children, released the children to their mother and permitted weekly visits between respondent and the children, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The finding of neglect was supported by a preponderance of the evidence, including testimony that respondent committed acts of domestic violence against the mother often in the children’s presence (Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i] [B]). These violent acts, including threatening the mother with a firearm, which was witnessed by one of the children while the other child slept nearby, exposed the children to an imminent risk of harm (see Matter of Elijah C., 49 AD3d 340 [2008]; Matter of Andrew Y., 44 AD3d 1063, 1064 [2007]), and there exists no basis to disturb the court’s credibility determinations (see Matter of Irene O., 38 NY2d 776 [1975]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Moskowitz, Renwick and Richter, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

66 A.D.2d 579, 886 N.Y.S.2d 604, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-errol-s-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack