In re Nicholas B.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Nicholas B.

8 A.D.3d 108, 778 N.Y.S.2d 495, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8342

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

DecidedJune 15, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 8 A.D.3d 108 (In re Nicholas 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 Nicholas B., 8 A.D.3d 108, 778 N.Y.S.2d 495, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8342 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

[109]*109Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Jody Adams, J.), entered on or about November 13, 2001, which, upon a finding of abuse, released the subject child to the care and custody of the mother with supervision by the Administration for Children’s Services for a period of 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

According the Family Court’s findings, particularly those as to witness credibility, the deference they are due (Matter of Irene O., 38 NY2d 776 [1975]), we see no reason to disturb the court’s finding that respondent was with the child at the time the child sustained his injury and failed to offer a reasonable explanation for said injury, and that the injury could not have reasonably occurred accidentally (Matter of Philip M., 82 NY2d 238 [1993]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Sullivan, Lerner and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

[109]*109Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Jody Adams, J.), entered on or about November 13, 2001, which, upon a finding of abuse, released the subject child to the care and custody of the mother with supervision by the Administration for Children’s Services for a period of 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

According the Family Court’s findings, particularly those as to witness credibility, the deference they are due (Matter of Irene O., 38 NY2d 776 [1975]), we see no reason to disturb the court’s finding that respondent was with the child at the time the child sustained his injury and failed to offer a reasonable explanation for said injury, and that the injury could not have reasonably occurred accidentally (Matter of Philip M., 82 NY2d 238 [1993]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Sullivan, Lerner and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 A.D.3d 108, 778 N.Y.S.2d 495, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8342, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-nicholas-b-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack