Opinion
April 19, 1996
Appeal from the Ontario County Family Court, Harvey, J.
Present — Green, J.P., Fallon, Wesley, Davis and Boehm, JJ.
Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and matter remitted to Ontario County Family Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: Family Court erred in revoking the suspension of the order of commitment ( see, Family Ct Act § 455) without conducting a hearing. "[I]t is well settled that a deprivation of liberty must be preceded by a fair hearing ( People ex rel. Silbert v. Cohen, 36 A.D.2d 331, affd 29 N.Y.2d 12; see also, Matter of Stagnar v. Stagnar, 98 A.D.2d 983; Matter of Rogers v. Rogers, 77 A.D.2d 818)" ( Matter of Balya [Plouffe] v. Riley, 212 A.D.2d 941, 943). "A hearing need not follow any particular form, but any meaningful hearing must, at least, consist of an adducement of proof coupled with an opportunity to rebut it" ( Matter of Schwartz v. Schwartz, 23 A.D.2d 204, 207). Before respondent is committed to jail, he must be afforded an "opportunity to be heard and to present witnesses" (Family Ct Act § 433 [a]) on the issue whether good cause existed to revoke the suspension of the sentence ( see, Family Ct Act § 455; Matter of Balya [Plouffe] v. Riley, supra, at 943).