Matter of Tamara D. (Randolph P.)

120 A.D.3d 813, 991 N.Y.S.2d 377
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedAugust 27, 2014
Docket2013-02048
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 120 A.D.3d 813 (Matter of Tamara D. (Randolph P.)) 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 Tamara D. (Randolph P.), 120 A.D.3d 813, 991 N.Y.S.2d 377 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Opinion

In a child neglect proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the father appeals from (1) an order of fact-finding of the Family Court, Kings County (White, J.), dated June 8, 2012, which, after a hearing, found that he neglected the subject child, and (2), as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of disposition of the same court dated December 21, 2013, as, in effect, denied his application for a suspended judgment.

Ordered that the appeal from the order of fact-finding is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as the order of fact-finding was superseded by the order of disposition and is brought up for review on the appeal from the order of disposition; and it is further,

Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The Family Court’s finding that the father neglected the subject child is supported by a preponderance of the credible evidence (see Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i] [B]; Matter of Ariella S. [Krystal C.], 89 AD3d 1092 [2011]; Matter of Kiara C. [David C.], 85 AD3d 1025 [2011]; Matter of Ndeye D. [Benjamin D.], 85 AD3d 1026 [2011]).

Also, given the father’s failure to admit responsibility for his *814 neglectful actions and to take corrective measures, including participation in the services offered to him prior to disposition, the Family Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying his application for a suspended judgment at disposition (see Matter of Victoria C. [Cassandra C.], 106 AD3d 1084, 1085 [2013]; Matter of Phillips N. [Joy N.], 104 AD3d 690, 691-692 [2013]; Matter of Ganesha B. [Nyesha H.], 78 AD3d 500 [2010]).

Dillon, J.E, Lott, Austin and Barros, JJ, concur.

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

Related

Matter of Altana D. (Ezena L.)
2019 NY Slip Op 7064 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Matter of John M.M. (Michael M.)
2018 NY Slip Op 2326 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Matter of Harmony H. (Welton H.)
2017 NY Slip Op 2037 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
In Re Divine F. Dutchess County Department of Social Services
140 A.D.3d 756 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
In Re Morgene R. Administration for Children's Services
135 A.D.3d 769 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Matter of Matthew G. (Miguel G.)
130 A.D.3d 621 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
120 A.D.3d 813, 991 N.Y.S.2d 377, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-tamara-d-randolph-p-nyappdiv-2014.