In re Richard R.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Richard R.

89 A.D.2d 897

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

DecidedAugust 16, 1982

StatusPublished

This text of 89 A.D.2d 897 (In re Richard R.) 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 Richard R., 89 A.D.2d 897 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

In a child neglect proceeding, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Deutsch, J.), dated March 11, 1982, which dismissed the petition. Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. We agree with the Family Court that the petitioner failed to sustain his burden. Petitioner was required to show that Richard’s grandmother neglected the child by subjecting him to excessive corporal [898]*898punishment. He failed in this task. However, it is clear that the child, who is emotionally handicapped, is in immediate need of therapy as offered by the Bureau of Child Welfare. Hence, we urge the grandmother and the bureau to co-operate with each other in providing Richard with the necessary treatment as promptly as possible. Mollen, P. J., Niehoff, Rubin and Boyers, JJ., concur.

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

In a child neglect proceeding, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Deutsch, J.), dated March 11, 1982, which dismissed the petition. Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. We agree with the Family Court that the petitioner failed to sustain his burden. Petitioner was required to show that Richard’s grandmother neglected the child by subjecting him to excessive corporal [898]*898punishment. He failed in this task. However, it is clear that the child, who is emotionally handicapped, is in immediate need of therapy as offered by the Bureau of Child Welfare. Hence, we urge the grandmother and the bureau to co-operate with each other in providing Richard with the necessary treatment as promptly as possible. Mollen, P. J., Niehoff, Rubin and Boyers, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

89 A.D.2d 897, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-richard-r-nyappdiv-1982.