In re Joseph C.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Joseph C.

297 A.D.2d 673, 747 N.Y.2d 182

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

DecidedSeptember 16, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 297 A.D.2d 673 (In re Joseph C.) 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 Joseph C., 297 A.D.2d 673, 747 N.Y.2d 182 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Contrary to the mother’s contention, the findings of neglect and abuse against her are supported by a fair preponderance of the evidence (see Family Ct Act § 1012; Matter of Baby Boy P., 287 AD2d 458). The evidence, inter alia, demonstrated that the mother abused the child in violation of Family Court Act § 1012 (e) (iii), by taking numerous nude photographs of him, some of which depicted the lewd exhibition of the child’s anus (see Penal Law § 263.05; Matter of Glenn G., 154 Misc 2d 677, affd sub nom. Matter of Josephine G., 218 AD2d 656). In addition, the Family Court providently exercised its discretion by drawing a negative inference against the mother upon her failure to testify at the hearing (see Matter of Jenny N., 262 AD2d 951).

The mother’s remaining contentions are without merit. Prudenti, P.J., Santucci, Altman and S. Miller, JJ., concur.

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

Contrary to the mother’s contention, the findings of neglect and abuse against her are supported by a fair preponderance of the evidence (see Family Ct Act § 1012; Matter of Baby Boy P., 287 AD2d 458). The evidence, inter alia, demonstrated that the mother abused the child in violation of Family Court Act § 1012 (e) (iii), by taking numerous nude photographs of him, some of which depicted the lewd exhibition of the child’s anus (see Penal Law § 263.05; Matter of Glenn G., 154 Misc 2d 677, affd sub nom. Matter of Josephine G., 218 AD2d 656). In addition, the Family Court providently exercised its discretion by drawing a negative inference against the mother upon her failure to testify at the hearing (see Matter of Jenny N., 262 AD2d 951).

The mother’s remaining contentions are without merit. Prudenti, P.J., Santucci, Altman and S. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

297 A.D.2d 673, 747 N.Y.2d 182, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-joseph-c-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack