From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Teresa L.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
May 22, 2013
106 A.D.3d 1008 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)

Opinion

2013-05-22

In the Matter of TERESA L. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, respondent; Tina L. (Anonymous), etc., appellant.

Christopher J. Robles, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Edward F.X. Hart and Drake A. Colley of counsel; Cindy A. Singh on the brief), for respondent.


Christopher J. Robles, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Edward F.X. Hart and Drake A. Colley of counsel; Cindy A. Singh on the brief), for respondent.
Steven Banks, New York, N.Y. (Tamara A. Steckler and Marcia Egger of counsel), attorney for the child.

In a child neglect proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the mother appeals from a fact-finding order of the Family Court, Richmond County (Wolff, J.), dated February 6, 2012, which, after a hearing, found that she neglected the subject child.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Family Court properly admitted into evidence the subject child's school attendance records for the year 2010–2011 because they were properly certified business records ( see Family Ct Act § 1046[a][iv] ).

The Family Court's determination that the mother had neglected the child was supported by a preponderance of the evidence. The finding of educational neglect was based on evidence that the child's excessive unexcused absences from school had a detrimental impact on her education insofar as she was retained in the sixth grade ( see Family Ct. Act §§ 1012[f][i][A]; 1046 [b]; Matter of Santino B. [ Lisette C.], 93 A.D.3d 1086, 941 N.Y.S.2d 743;Matter of Patrick S., 52 A.D.3d 837, 861 N.Y.S.2d 128;Matter of Evan F., 48 A.D.3d 811, 853 N.Y.S.2d 142;see also Matter of Gabriella G. [ Jeannine G.], 104 A.D.3d 1136, 962 N.Y.S.2d 537). In addition, the Family Court properly determined that the mother's failure to ensure that the child continued in psychotherapy to treat an anxiety disorder contributed to those excessive absences, and also constituted neglect upon the ground of inadequate supervision and guardianship ( see Family Ct. Act § 1012[f][i][B]; Matter of Kinara C. [ Jerome C.], 89 A.D.3d 839, 932 N.Y.S.2d 169).

MASTRO, J.P., LEVENTHAL, SGROI and COHEN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

In re Teresa L.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
May 22, 2013
106 A.D.3d 1008 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
Case details for

In re Teresa L.

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of TERESA L. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: May 22, 2013

Citations

106 A.D.3d 1008 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
965 N.Y.S.2d 382
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 3678

Citing Cases

Jonathan M. v. Gilda L.

The finding of neglect was supported by a preponderance of the evidence that the mother's paramour, who took…

In re Kiamal E.

Here, the evidence at the fact-finding hearing established that the mother neglected the children Kiamal E.…