Matter of Jasmine G. (Pamela G.)

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Jasmine G. (Pamela G.)

2017 NY Slip Op 1315, 147 A.D.3d 593, 47 N.Y.S.3d 311

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

DecidedFebruary 21, 2017

Docket3160

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 1315 (Matter of Jasmine G. (Pamela G.)) 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

Matter of Jasmine G. (Pamela G.), 2017 NY Slip Op 1315, 147 A.D.3d 593, 47 N.Y.S.3d 311 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of fact-finding, Family Court, New York County (Clark V. Richardson, J.), entered on or about November 2, 2015, which, after a hearing, determined that respondent mother neglected the subject child Jasmine G. and derivatively neglected the subject child Jackie B., unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s finding of neglect was supported by a preponderance of the evidence showing that the mother neglected the older daughter, then age 13, by impairing her physical, mental or emotional condition (see Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i] [A], [B]). The mother impaired the subject child’s physical condition by making her sit outside the home in freezing temperatures for hours at a time, without sufficient clothing or proper food, while yelling and cursing at her from inside (see Matter of Jessica DiB., 6 AD3d 533, 534 [2d Dept 2004]). The mother also withheld food from the child, or offered her foods that she did not like or was allergic to, so that the younger daughter would have to sneak food to her sister, at the risk of getting into trouble. As she previously did with her oldest child, a son, the mother emotionally rejected the subject child, stating in front of her that the petitioner agency could “keep” her (Matter of Jason G. [Pamela G.], 126 AD3d 489, 490 [1st Dept 2015]; see Matter of Shawntay S. [Stephanie R.], 114 AD3d 502 [1st Dept 2014]).

These actions and lack of insight demonstrated a flawed understanding of her parental responsibilities sufficient to sup *594 port the derivative finding of neglect with respect to her youngest child, who witnessed the treatment of her sister (see Matter of Vincent M., 193 AD2d 398 [1st Dept 1993]).

We have considered the mother’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

Concur — Acosta, J.P., Renwick, Moskow-itz, Feinman and Gesmer, JJ.

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

Order of fact-finding, Family Court, New York County (Clark V. Richardson, J.), entered on or about November 2, 2015, which, after a hearing, determined that respondent mother neglected the subject child Jasmine G. and derivatively neglected the subject child Jackie B., unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s finding of neglect was supported by a preponderance of the evidence showing that the mother neglected the older daughter, then age 13, by impairing her physical, mental or emotional condition (see Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i] [A], [B]). The mother impaired the subject child’s physical condition by making her sit outside the home in freezing temperatures for hours at a time, without sufficient clothing or proper food, while yelling and cursing at her from inside (see Matter of Jessica DiB., 6 AD3d 533, 534 [2d Dept 2004]). The mother also withheld food from the child, or offered her foods that she did not like or was allergic to, so that the younger daughter would have to sneak food to her sister, at the risk of getting into trouble. As she previously did with her oldest child, a son, the mother emotionally rejected the subject child, stating in front of her that the petitioner agency could “keep” her (Matter of Jason G. [Pamela G.], 126 AD3d 489, 490 [1st Dept 2015]; see Matter of Shawntay S. [Stephanie R.], 114 AD3d 502 [1st Dept 2014]).

These actions and lack of insight demonstrated a flawed understanding of her parental responsibilities sufficient to sup *594 port the derivative finding of neglect with respect to her youngest child, who witnessed the treatment of her sister (see Matter of Vincent M., 193 AD2d 398 [1st Dept 1993]).

We have considered the mother’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

Concur — Acosta, J.P., Renwick, Moskow-itz, Feinman and Gesmer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2017 NY Slip Op 1315, 147 A.D.3d 593, 47 N.Y.S.3d 311, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-jasmine-g-pamela-g-nyappdiv-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack