Matter of Malachi H. (Dequisa H.)

125 A.D.3d 478, 2 N.Y.S.3d 482
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 10, 2015
Docket14204 14203
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 125 A.D.3d 478 (Matter of Malachi H. (Dequisa H.)) 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 Malachi H. (Dequisa H.), 125 A.D.3d 478, 2 N.Y.S.3d 482 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Stewart H. Weinstein, J.), entered on or about February 20, 2014, to the extent it brings up for review a fact-finding order (same court and Judge), entered on or about December 5, 2013, which, after a hearing, determined that respondent neglected the subject child, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from the fact-finding order, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the order of disposition.

The finding of neglect is supported by a preponderance of the evidence, which demonstrates that respondent left her then two-year-old son alone in her apartment for an hour and that he was discovered in the hallway outside the apartment while she was out (see Family Ct Act § 1046 [b] [i]). Respondent’s conduct placed her son in imminent danger of physical or emotional harm, and constitutes neglect, notwithstanding that the child was unharmed (see Family Ct Act § 1012 [f| [i] [B]; Matter of Rosemary V. [Jorge V.], 103 AD3d 484 [1st Dept 2013]).

Since respondent made no application for dismissal pursuant to Family Court Act § 1051 (c), her contention that the court should have dismissed the petition because the aid of the court was no longer required is unpreserved, and we decline to consider it (see Matter of Cherish C. [Shanikwa C.], 102 AD3d 597 [1st Dept 2013]). Were we to consider it, we would reject it.

Concur — Sweeny, J.R, Renwick, Moskowitz, Feinman and Kapnick, JJ.

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

Related

Matter of Gelani M. (Paul M.)
2023 NY Slip Op 06442 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
Matter of Trinity E. (Sherry E.)
2021 NY Slip Op 07315 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
Matter of Jesiel C. v. (Rosalie v.
2020 NY Slip Op 07521 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Matter of Dream F. (Phillystina R.)
2020 NY Slip Op 05832 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Matter of Annabella C. (Sandra C.)
2019 NY Slip Op 777 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Matter of Daleena T. (Wanda W.--Derek T.)
2016 NY Slip Op 8938 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Matter of I.A. (Devona H.)
132 A.D.3d 757 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
125 A.D.3d 478, 2 N.Y.S.3d 482, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-malachi-h-dequisa-h-nyappdiv-2015.