Rowe v. New York State Office of Children & Family Services

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rowe v. New York State Office of Children & Family Services

90 A.D.3d 1704, 934 N.Y.2d 923

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

DecidedDecember 30, 2011

StatusPublished

This text of 90 A.D.3d 1704 (Rowe v. New York State Office of Children & Family Services) 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

Rowe v. New York State Office of Children & Family Services, 90 A.D.3d 1704, 934 N.Y.2d 923 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum:

Petitioners commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking to annul the determination of respondent New York State Office of Children and Family Services denying their request to amend an indicated report of maltreatment to provide instead that the report was unfounded (see Social Services Law § 422 [8] [a] [v]; [c] [ii]). “Upon our review of the record, we conclude that there is a rational basis for the agency’s determination and that it is supported by substantial evidence” (Matter of Draman v New York State Off. of Children & Family Servs., 78 AD3d 1603, 1603-1604 [2010]; see Matter of Theresa G. v Johnson, 26 AD3d 726 [2006]). Present — Smith, J.R, Fahey, Peradotto, Garni and Sconiers, JJ.

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

Memorandum:

Petitioners commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking to annul the determination of respondent New York State Office of Children and Family Services denying their request to amend an indicated report of maltreatment to provide instead that the report was unfounded (see Social Services Law § 422 [8] [a] [v]; [c] [ii]). “Upon our review of the record, we conclude that there is a rational basis for the agency’s determination and that it is supported by substantial evidence” (Matter of Draman v New York State Off. of Children & Family Servs., 78 AD3d 1603, 1603-1604 [2010]; see Matter of Theresa G. v Johnson, 26 AD3d 726 [2006]). Present — Smith, J.R, Fahey, Peradotto, Garni and Sconiers, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

90 A.D.3d 1704, 934 N.Y.2d 923, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rowe-v-new-york-state-office-of-children-family-services-nyappdiv-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack