In re Rae Ann Q.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Rae Ann Q.

299 A.D.2d 487, 749 N.Y.S.2d 905

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

DecidedNovember 18, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 299 A.D.2d 487 (In re Rae Ann Q.) 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 Rae Ann Q., 299 A.D.2d 487, 749 N.Y.S.2d 905 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

In a child neglect proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the appeal, as limited by the brief, is from so much of an order of fact-finding and disposition (one paper) of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Pach, J.), entered January 24, 2001, as, after a hearing, found that the subject children were neglected.

Ordered that the order of fact-finding and disposition is af[488]*488firmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The Family Court properly found that the appellant neglected the subject children (see Family Ct Act § 1046 [a] [vi]; [b] [i]). Testimony at the fact-finding hearing established that, on the occasion in question, the appellant and the children’s mother were highly intoxicated in the presence of the children and a domestic disturbance ensued. A neglect finding therefore was warranted based on the appellant’s abuse of alcohol, as well as his failure to protect the children from a substantial risk of harm due to their mother’s abuse of alcohol (see Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i] [B]; § 1046 [a] [iii]; Matter of Shyasia L., 286 AD2d 391; Matter of Arthur C., 260 AD2d 478).

The appellant’s remaining contention is without merit. Krausman, J.P., Friedmann, H. Miller and Cozier, JJ., concur.

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

In a child neglect proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the appeal, as limited by the brief, is from so much of an order of fact-finding and disposition (one paper) of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Pach, J.), entered January 24, 2001, as, after a hearing, found that the subject children were neglected.

Ordered that the order of fact-finding and disposition is af[488]*488firmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The Family Court properly found that the appellant neglected the subject children (see Family Ct Act § 1046 [a] [vi]; [b] [i]). Testimony at the fact-finding hearing established that, on the occasion in question, the appellant and the children’s mother were highly intoxicated in the presence of the children and a domestic disturbance ensued. A neglect finding therefore was warranted based on the appellant’s abuse of alcohol, as well as his failure to protect the children from a substantial risk of harm due to their mother’s abuse of alcohol (see Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i] [B]; § 1046 [a] [iii]; Matter of Shyasia L., 286 AD2d 391; Matter of Arthur C., 260 AD2d 478).

The appellant’s remaining contention is without merit. Krausman, J.P., Friedmann, H. Miller and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

299 A.D.2d 487, 749 N.Y.S.2d 905, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-rae-ann-q-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack