In re Mohammad K.B.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Mohammad K.B.

99 A.D.3d 796, 951 N.Y.2d 887

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

DecidedOctober 10, 2012

StatusPublished

This text of 99 A.D.3d 796 (In re Mohammad K.B.) 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 Mohammad K.B., 99 A.D.3d 796, 951 N.Y.2d 887 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

The evidence supports the Family Court’s determination that the father neglected the subject children by engaging in acts of domestic violence against the children’s mother in their presence that impaired, or created an imminent danger of impairing, their physical, emotional, or mental conditions (see Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i] [B]; Matter of Lawrence G. [Lawrence P.G.— Stefanie V.], 97 AD3d 748 [2012]; Matter of Kiara C. [David C.], 85 AD3d 1025, 1026 [2011]). Moreover, additional evidence established a pattern of domestic violence and intimidation perpetrated by the father.

[797]*797Further, the Family Court properly denied the branch of the father’s motion which was to vacate the determination in the order dated March 23, 2010, finding that he neglected the subject children (see CPLR 5015 [a]).

The father’s remaining contentions either are without merit or refer to matter dehors the record. Skelos, J.P., Balkin, Leventhal and Cohen, JJ., concur.

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

The evidence supports the Family Court’s determination that the father neglected the subject children by engaging in acts of domestic violence against the children’s mother in their presence that impaired, or created an imminent danger of impairing, their physical, emotional, or mental conditions (see Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i] [B]; Matter of Lawrence G. [Lawrence P.G.— Stefanie V.], 97 AD3d 748 [2012]; Matter of Kiara C. [David C.], 85 AD3d 1025, 1026 [2011]). Moreover, additional evidence established a pattern of domestic violence and intimidation perpetrated by the father.

[797]*797Further, the Family Court properly denied the branch of the father’s motion which was to vacate the determination in the order dated March 23, 2010, finding that he neglected the subject children (see CPLR 5015 [a]).

The father’s remaining contentions either are without merit or refer to matter dehors the record. Skelos, J.P., Balkin, Leventhal and Cohen, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

99 A.D.3d 796, 951 N.Y.2d 887, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-mohammad-kb-nyappdiv-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack