Queens

Published on: October 2, 2024

Appellate Division found that injuries are not required to meet criminal definition of serious physical injury to be considered child abuse. Admin. for Children’s Servs. v. Ferida B. (In re Jonah B.), 85 N.Y.S.3d 505 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)

by Stephen Bilkis

This case involved three related child abuse and neglect proceedings under the Family Court Act, Article 10, in Queens County, New York. The Administration for Children’s Services (ACS) filed allegations against the parents and maternal grandmother of a child named Talia. The Family Court, after a fact-finding hearing, dismissed allegations of abuse and derivative abuse. ACS and the children appealed, arguing that the court erred in not finding abuse.

Background Facts

In April 2014, ACS began two child abuse and neglect proceedings against the mother, father, maternal grandmother, and paternal grandmother. The allegations centered on the care of the child Talia, who was four months old at the time. Talia was taken to the hospital on April 7, 2014, where doctors diagnosed her with multiple injuries, including rib fractures, fractures in both legs, and a fracture in her right arm. The injuries occurred between her birth on December 5, 2013, and April 7, 2014. ACS claimed these injuries were not accidental and were inflicted while Talia was in the care of her parents and grandmothers. ACS also argued that Jonah, Talia’s sibling, was derivatively abused.

Published on: September 6, 2024

Father found to have neglected his children due to them witnessing his abuse of their mother. In re Jayline J., 156 A.D.3d 701, 64 N.Y.S.3d 916 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)

by Stephen Bilkis

Domestic violence cases commonly involve violence between intimate partners, with one partner assaulting the other. While one victim is always the person who has been directly physically abused, other victims can include any children who witness the abuse. In the case of In re Jayline J., 156 A.D.3d 701, 64 N.Y.S.3d 916 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017), the Administration for Children’s Services (ACS) initiated a neglect proceeding in Family Court, Queens County, against a father, alleging that he had neglected his child by exposing her to domestic violence. After a fact-finding hearing, the court ruled that the father had indeed neglected the child. The father appealed the ruling, disputing the findings. This case presents an examination of the standard for proving neglect under New York law and how domestic violence can impact a child’s well-being.

Background Facts

In March 2015, ACS brought an action against the father, accusing him of neglect. According to the allegations, the father subjected the child’s mother to domestic violence in the presence of the child. Under New York law, exposing a child to domestic violence can constitute neglect if it leads to harm or imminent risk of harm to the child’s physical, mental, or emotional condition.

Published on: June 19, 2024

Finding of sexual abuse by father supported by evidence; requirement of supervised visits upheld. Admin. for Children’s Servs. v. Victor P. (In re Victoria P.), 2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 7169 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)

by Stephen Bilkis

Supervised visitation visits refer to a type of visitation where a third party, such as a social worker or designated family member, is present during the parent’s time with the child. This is done to ensure the child’s safety and well-being while maintaining a controlled environment for the parent-child interaction. The supervising party observes the visits to ensure no inappropriate behavior occurs, and the visits are typically held in a neutral location. In the case of Admin. for Children’s Servs. v. Victor P. (In re Victoria P.), 2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 7169 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014) the father, Victor P., appealed a Family Court decision requiring him to complete a sex offender treatment program and limiting his visitation rights to supervised visits with his children, based on findings of sexual abuse and derivative neglect.

Background Facts

This case stemmed from allegations of sexual abuse against Victor P., the father of Elizabeth P. During a fact-finding hearing, the court found that Victor P. had abused Elizabeth P. and derivatively neglected his other children: Victoria P., Wilma P., and Ivan G. Following these findings, the court issued a dispositional order requiring Victor P. to complete a sex offender treatment program and limited his visitation with his children to supervised visits, at the discretion of the Administration for Children’s Services (ACS).

Published on: June 14, 2016

Court Orders that Plaintiff be Responsible for Hospital Expenses of the Defendant

by Stephen Bilkis

In an action in which a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, was entered, Inter alia, granting plaintiff and defendant a divorce, defendants appeal from an order of the same court, dated July 27, 1978, which, upon plaintiff’s motion, “resettled and clarified” the judgment of divorce, by (1) amending and reducing defendant H’s visitation privileges, and (2) amending a provision whereby plaintiff would be responsible for certain hospitalization expenses incurred by defendant.

By judgment of the Supreme Court, plaintiff, Mr. H, and defendant Mrs. H were both granted a divorce. That judgment awarded temporary custody of the couple’s son to plaintiff. Mrs. H was to have visitation on the first, second and fourth weekends of each month, as well as on certain other days. The judgment further provided as follows:

“ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED, that the plaintiff will pay any hospitalization fees in the event that the defendant is committed to a psychiatric hospital by a duly certified psychiatrist; that the plaintiff’s attorney shall receive a doctor’s prescription of the defendant’s need and a further copy furnished to this Court”.

Published on: March 30, 2015

Court Decides How Domicile of Claimant Effects Case

by Stephen Bilkis

In this probate proceeding objections were filed and a jury demanded by respondents. A motion is now made by them to dismiss the petition before any trial on the merits upon the ground that the decedent was not a (domiciliary) resident of Nassau County at her death on February 14, 1977 as specified in SCPA 206, subd. 1. They request that the proceeding be forwarded to New York County as the “proper county of residence” and also for the convenience of witnesses.

In support of the motion there have been filed affidavits of respondents’ attorney and of respondent, along with copies of affidavits and exhibits which had been previously submitted to this court in connection with an application to revoke letters testamentary which had been issued to the proponent here on the estate of this decedent’s husband, who died on May 26, 1975. In opposition to the motion various other facts are asserted to sustain proponent’s claim that Nassau County was the domiciliary residence of decedent and both attorneys have submitted memoranda in support of their respective positions. The court has examined them and will discuss below the various facts alleged by both sides.

Published on: October 10, 2012

Court Rules on Child Neglect Case

by Stephen Bilkis

This is an application for guardianship of a child pursuant to the provisions that are set up under the Social Services Law. The petitioner and appellant of the case is Graham Windham. The respondent of the case is Deborah K. This case is being heard in the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

Case Background

A New York Family Lawyer said the child in this case is Shantal who was born on the 26th of November, 1970. In December of 1970 Shantal was placed with the Agency voluntarily as the mother had no home for the child to live in. Shantal was placed with a foster family until April of 1971. Shantal was returned to her mother at this time.

Published on: August 12, 2011

Dad Left Child Alone with Loaded Weapon

by Stephen Bilkis

Police have recently charged a man in a worrying case where he left his child alone with a loaded weapon. The man went out and is alleged to of left his five year old daughter alone in the house with a loaded gun explains a New York Family Lawyer. This left his child in extreme danger of being killed, or injured.

While adults will understand that these weapons are dangerous and should not be touched, Children will not. A 5 year old child would not know that the gun wasn’t a toy which is what makes the case even more dangerous.

The 44 year old man was arrested for operating machinery under the influence. The arrest was made during the early evening of March 19th. The Police report has since been obtained by the NYC Family Lawyer.

Published on: June 20, 2011

Authorities crack down on truancy by sending non-compliant parents to jail

by Stephen Bilkis

 Remember the good old days when skipping a day of school was not punishable by fines and jail time? Most of us have taken an unscheduled day off of school at one time or another as children, having begged our parents, with sleepy eyes, to just let us stay in bed, suggests a New York Family Lawyer. According to school officials and lawmakers, those days are no longer acceptable.   Truancy is a big problem in public schools, reports a New York Family Lawyer. A truant child is one who has three or more unexcused absences in a school year. Those just because days are to blame. Authorities are sending a big message that it is not okay for children to miss school just because they don’t feel like going.

Although this is not your normal Child Neglect, in New York City and Queens this kind of parental action or lack thereof comes very close.

Now a new law has been enacted that will fine parents of habitually truant children up to $2000 if they do not attempt to see that their children are at their desk each and every day.   Granted, there are parents who simply do not care whether their kids get an education or not, and these parents are the focus of these heightened penalties. And while a $2000 fine might seem excessive, failing to pay that fine and get your kids up and on the bus could land parents in jail, according to this new law.   Obviously this bill is targeted towards parents of children whose truancy has become excessive and will not affect a family who decides to take a road trip one day rather than sit in a stuffy classroom or work cubicle, establishes the New York Family Lawyer. Even so, it might make parents think twice when considering the pleas of sleepy children that a day off from school is exactly what they need.