New York Family Law Blog
The family court in this cased was tasked to decide whether or not it has the right to issue an order of protection against the father of the children who allegedly abused his minor sister-in-law. According to a New York Family Lawyer on behalf of the abused child, the social services department filed a petition against the father for abuse of his sister-in-law and neglecting his own children. Based on the investigation made by the family court, the father is determined to be guilty of abuse.
According to the facts gathered by the investigation, the sister-in-law moved in to the house of the children’s father when she was 16 years old. The father had intercourse with her inside the house and the hotel room where the rest of the family stayed for a brief period. The father was also guilty of neglect since one of his sons was a witness to the sexual abuse. A New York Criminal Lawyer said the father also had a loaded gun inside their home which could prove to be dangerous to his sons. One son was still a baby while the other was a toddler during that time.
After the court findings were revealed, the family court has ordered child custody to the mother of the children. The court also did not impose any terms and issued protection orders. The father was ordered by the court to avoid any contact with his sons until they reach the age of majority. No protection order was issued for the abused sister-in-law since she was already 18 by the date of the hearing.
The father had filed for a petition to appeal his case regarding the no contact policy imposed by the court. The father also challenged the authority of the court on this matter. The court of appeals denied the petition of the father and affirmed the decision of the family court.
A Nassau County Family Lawyer said that according to the findings of the appeals court, the family court had authority to issue protection orders for the children since they no expiry date. The law states that the family court can issue protection orders for a specified period. There was no provision that limited this particular statement of law.
The appeals court cited previous cases for its decision to deny the father’s appeal. Upon further review of the law, other kinds of child protection proceedings have a limited period and may sometimes extend the hearings. The provisions that allow these instances ensure that the courts have sufficient time to review the extension request. It has been noted by the court that protection order may not exclude one of the parents to have custody of their children. This type of situation is the same as issuing a placement order for the children, thus, the period for review should be the same. This particular provision is stated in the amended family law. After the amendments have been made, the courts still continue to order protection orders against members of the family that have a period that runs until the age of majority.
A Queens Family Lawyer said that the family court awarded the children to the mother as stated in the dispositional order. The custody order of the children had no expiry date. It has been noted by the court that the order did not contain the usual terms for treatment of some kind. It also contained no chance of returning the children to the father sometime in the future. The orders of protection also did not include a condition that will give the father the opportunity to file for a modification.
The court has determined that the dispositional order issued by the family court should not go hand in hand with a protection order with no expiry date. The family court has to provide an expiration date for the protection orders. The court must also review the condition of the children periodically.
If you know someone who needs a family lawyer, consult Stephen Bilkis & Associates for immediate action. The legal services of our team can help you prepare for any child custody and family court case.