In re Mark H.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Mark H.

259 A.D.2d 1040, 689 N.Y.S.2d 888, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3471

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 31, 1999·Published

Opinion

Amended order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: In this Family Court Act article 10 proceeding alleging sexual abuse, Family Court properly gave collateral estoppel effect to respondent’s plea of guilty to charges of sexual abuse in a parallel criminal proceeding (see, Matter of Suffolk [1041]*1041County Dept. of Social Servs. [Michael V.] v James M., 83 NY2d 178, 182-183; Matter of Jimmy A., 218 AD2d 734, 735; Matter of Sarah L., 207 AD2d 1016). (Appeal from Amended Order of Niagara County Family Court, Batt, J. — Abuse.) Present— Denman, P. J., Green, Pine, Hayes and Hurlbutt, JJ.

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

Amended order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: In this Family Court Act article 10 proceeding alleging sexual abuse, Family Court properly gave collateral estoppel effect to respondent’s plea of guilty to charges of sexual abuse in a parallel criminal proceeding (see, Matter of Suffolk [1041]*1041County Dept. of Social Servs. [Michael V.] v James M., 83 NY2d 178, 182-183; Matter of Jimmy A., 218 AD2d 734, 735; Matter of Sarah L., 207 AD2d 1016). (Appeal from Amended Order of Niagara County Family Court, Batt, J. — Abuse.) Present— Denman, P. J., Green, Pine, Hayes and Hurlbutt, JJ.

In re Mark H., 259 A.D.2d 1040, 689 N.Y.S.2d 888, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3471 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

259 A.D.2d 1040 (In re Mark H.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related