In re Sheila L.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Sheila L.

141 A.D.2d 730, 529 N.Y.S.2d 1015, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7036

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

DecidedJune 20, 1988

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 141 A.D.2d 730 (In re Sheila L.) 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 Sheila L., 141 A.D.2d 730, 529 N.Y.S.2d 1015, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7036 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

In a child abuse proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the appeals are from (1) an order of the Family Court, Richmond County (Leddy, J.), dated March [731]*73129, 1985, which, after a fact-finding hearing, adjudged that the child in question had been abused by the appellant and (2) a dispositional order of the same court, dated July 2, 1985, which placed the child in the petitioner’s custody for 18 months.

Ordered that the orders are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The determination by the Family Court that the appellant had sexually and physically abused his adopted daughter, the subject of this proceeding, is supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see, Family Ct Act § 1046 [b]; Matter of Tammie Z., 66 NY2d 1). Where, as here, the hearing court was confronted primarily with issues of credibility, its factual findings must be accorded great weight. On this record, we find no basis upon which to disturb the court’s disposition of the issue (see, Matter of Irene O., 38 NY2d 776, 778; Matter of Kimberly X., 133 AD2d 226, 227). Moreover, the appellant’s claims with respect to the manner in which the hearing was conducted and several of the evidentiary rulings and statements by the Family Court are either without basis in fact or lacking in merit. Bracken, J. P., Fiber, Kooper and Harwood, JJ., concur.

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

In a child abuse proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the appeals are from (1) an order of the Family Court, Richmond County (Leddy, J.), dated March [731]*73129, 1985, which, after a fact-finding hearing, adjudged that the child in question had been abused by the appellant and (2) a dispositional order of the same court, dated July 2, 1985, which placed the child in the petitioner’s custody for 18 months.

Ordered that the orders are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The determination by the Family Court that the appellant had sexually and physically abused his adopted daughter, the subject of this proceeding, is supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see, Family Ct Act § 1046 [b]; Matter of Tammie Z., 66 NY2d 1). Where, as here, the hearing court was confronted primarily with issues of credibility, its factual findings must be accorded great weight. On this record, we find no basis upon which to disturb the court’s disposition of the issue (see, Matter of Irene O., 38 NY2d 776, 778; Matter of Kimberly X., 133 AD2d 226, 227). Moreover, the appellant’s claims with respect to the manner in which the hearing was conducted and several of the evidentiary rulings and statements by the Family Court are either without basis in fact or lacking in merit. Bracken, J. P., Fiber, Kooper and Harwood, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

141 A.D.2d 730, 529 N.Y.S.2d 1015, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7036, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-sheila-l-nyappdiv-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack