In re Lillian H.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Lillian H.

254 A.D.2d 237, 679 N.Y.S.2d 142, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11417

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

DecidedOctober 29, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 254 A.D.2d 237 (In re Lillian H.) 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 Lillian H., 254 A.D.2d 237, 679 N.Y.S.2d 142, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11417 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Leah Marks, J.), entered March 24, 1997, which, insofar as appealed from, upon a finding of neglect, placed the subject child in custody of petitioner Commissioner of Social Services, with supervised visitation by appellant, the child’s grandmother, “until such time as she cooperates fully with counselling and therapy”, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Ample evidence supports the findings that the apartment in which the one-year old child was living was unsanitary and unsafe, with garbage and nonworking appliances strewn about, a nonworking, moldy refrigerator, no refrigerated food, no water, many cats, including a dead one, and a two and a half foot-long machete on the floor behind a door within reach of the child who was crawling around the apartment — all presenting a threat of imminent danger to the child’s physical and emotional well being. Given such conditions, the court should not “ ‘await broken bone or shattered psyche’ ” (Matter of Cruz, 121 AD2d 901, 903; Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i]). Concur— Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Mazzarelli, Andrias and Saxe, JJ.

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

Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Leah Marks, J.), entered March 24, 1997, which, insofar as appealed from, upon a finding of neglect, placed the subject child in custody of petitioner Commissioner of Social Services, with supervised visitation by appellant, the child’s grandmother, “until such time as she cooperates fully with counselling and therapy”, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Ample evidence supports the findings that the apartment in which the one-year old child was living was unsanitary and unsafe, with garbage and nonworking appliances strewn about, a nonworking, moldy refrigerator, no refrigerated food, no water, many cats, including a dead one, and a two and a half foot-long machete on the floor behind a door within reach of the child who was crawling around the apartment — all presenting a threat of imminent danger to the child’s physical and emotional well being. Given such conditions, the court should not “ ‘await broken bone or shattered psyche’ ” (Matter of Cruz, 121 AD2d 901, 903; Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i]). Concur— Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Mazzarelli, Andrias and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

254 A.D.2d 237, 679 N.Y.S.2d 142, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11417, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-lillian-h-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack