New York Family Law Blog
In New York, the Statewide Central Register of Child Abuse and Maltreatment (SCR) maintains records of indicated reports of abuse and neglect. These reports can affect a person’s ability to work with children or adopt. In the case of Matter of Johnny S. v. New York State Office of Children & Family Services, the Appellate Division, Third Department, reviewed a challenge to two such reports. The case focused on whether the petitioner had committed child maltreatment, and whether the reports should remain in the SCR.
Background Facts
The case arose after the Albany County Department of Social Services (DSS) investigated allegations that the petitioner, Johnny S., had sexually abused his teenage stepdaughter. The child, born in 2001, made several allegations during the investigation. DSS found the reports to be indicated and filed them with the SCR.
After the reports were filed, Johnny S. asked the New York State Office of Children and Family Services (OCFS) to amend the reports from indicated to unfounded and remove them from the register. OCFS denied this request and scheduled an administrative hearing under Social Services Law § 422(8).
At the hearing, both DSS and the petitioner presented evidence. DSS relied heavily on the testimony of a caseworker and documentary evidence. Johnny S. denied the allegations.
Question Before the Court
Whether the administrative determination by OCFS—upholding the reports as indicated and refusing to amend or expunge them—was supported by substantial evidence. The court also had to decide whether the reports were relevant to employment in a childcare setting or to adoption or foster care.
Court’s Decision
The Appellate Division upheld the agency’s decision. It found that DSS had met its burden of proof to show maltreatment by a preponderance of the evidence. The court also found that the decision to retain the reports in the SCR as relevant to childcare and adoption was supported by substantial evidence.
Discussion
Under New York law, DSS must show that a child’s physical, mental, or emotional condition has been or is in imminent danger of being impaired due to a caretaker’s failure to provide a minimum level of care. This includes protection from sexual abuse. The definition of maltreatment in this context includes sexual contact between a caretaker and a child, and providing alcohol to a child.
In this case, DSS presented evidence that the petitioner touched the child inappropriately while sharing a bed with her during a family trip. He also allegedly made the child touch his inner thigh and provided her with alcohol. Petitioner admitted that he and the child shared a bed, which corroborated part of the child’s story.
DSS also submitted treatment records showing that the child experienced psychological harm. The records supported the child’s version of events and indicated a link between the alleged abuse and her mental health condition.
Most of DSS’s evidence was hearsay. However, hearsay is allowed in administrative hearings and can support a finding if it is probative and reliable. The court noted that hearsay from the child, the caseworker, and the treatment records together provided sufficient support.
Johnny S. denied all allegations and maintained his innocence. He claimed the child’s statements were not credible and that he had not committed any inappropriate conduct. However, the hearing officer found the DSS witnesses and evidence more credible. The administrative law judge’s findings were adopted by OCFS, and the court deferred to that credibility assessment.
The court found that there was substantial evidence that maltreatment had occurred and that the petitioner’s conduct placed the child at risk. It also agreed that the information was relevant to any job involving the care of children and could be considered if the petitioner sought to adopt or foster children.
In child maltreatment cases, the law does not require criminal charges or convictions. The standard of proof is lower than in criminal cases. Instead of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, DSS must show that maltreatment is more likely than not to have occurred. This lower standard applies in administrative hearings such as this one.
The court did not address every argument raised by the petitioner but stated that any remaining claims were without merit. The focus of the opinion remained on the credibility of the evidence and whether it met the required standard.
Conclusion
The Appellate Division upheld the decision of OCFS to retain the indicated reports of child maltreatment against Johnny S. in the Statewide Central Register. The court found that the evidence met the legal standard and that the information could be used to assess his fitness to work with or care for children. The case shows how child neglect and abuse investigations are handled administratively in New York and highlights the role of hearsay evidence, the standards of proof, and the impact of such findings on future employment or caregiving opportunities.
If you have been accused of child abuse or neglect or are involved in a CPS investigation, it is important to understand your legal rights and the possible consequences. Contact an experienced New York child abuse and neglect lawyer at Stephen Bilkis & Associates to discuss your situation and learn about your legal options.