In re Faith J., 47 A.D.3d 630 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008). · Go Syfert
Search
In re Faith J., 47 A.D.3d 630 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
20 citation events (20 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Matter of Kyle R. (Sherika S.) (nyappdiv, 2015-01-28)
Treatment trajectory · 2009 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2009 2017 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Kyle R. (Sherika S.)
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
Here, contrary to the mother’s contention, a preponderance of the evidence established that the subject child’s physical, mental, or emotional condition was in imminent danger of becoming impaired as a result of the mother’s behavior (see Matter of Isaiah M. [Antoya M.], 96 AD3d 516 , 517 [2012]; Matter of Faith J., 47 AD3d 630, 630 [2008]; Matter of Pedro C. [Josephine B.], 1 AD3d 267, 268 [2003]; Matter of Barbara S., 244 AD2d 556, 556-557 [1997]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In re Makenzie C.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2014 · confidence medium
Contrary to the sole contention raised by the mother on appeal, the finding of neglect against her was supported by a preponderance of the evidence, as the evidence adduced at the hearing established that she failed to exercise the minimum degree of care to prevent the imminent danger of the emotional and mental impairment of the subject children (see Family Ct Act §§ 1012 [f] [i]; 1046 [b] [i]; Matter of Andrew B. [Deborah B.], 73 AD3d 1036, 1036-1037 [2010]; Matter of Daniel D., 57 AD3d 444, 444 [2008]; Matter of Faith J., 47 AD3d 630, 630 [2008]; Matter of My’Kia A., 8 AD3d 481, 482 [20…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In re Makenzie C.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2014 · confidence medium
Contrary to the sole contention raised by the mother on appeal, the finding of neglect against her was supported by a preponderance of the evidence, as the evidence adduced at the hearing established that she failed to exercise the minimum degree of care to prevent the imminent danger of the emotional and mental impairment of the subject children (see Family Ct Act §§ 1012 [f] [i]; 1046 [b] [i]; Matter of Andrew B. [Deborah B.], 73 AD3d 1036, 1036-1037 [2010]; Matter of Daniel D., 57 AD3d 444, 444 [2008]; Matter of Faith J., 47 AD3d 630, 630 [2008]; Matter of My’Kia A., 8 AD3d 481, 482 [20…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) S., CHRISTY v. S., PHONESAVANH
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · confidence medium
The evidence established that the child’s emotional condition has been impaired as a result of the father’s “bizarre and paranoid behavior,” which resulted in the child being frightened and depressed (Matter of Faith J., 47 AD3d 630, 630 [2008]; see generally Nicholson v Scoppetta, 3 NY3d 357, 371-372 [2004]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In re Ricardo Z.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2010 · confidence medium
Inasmuch as the period of placement has expired, the issue raised on appeal has been rendered academic (see Matter of Ramon D., 70 AD3d 685, 686 [2010]; Matter of Crystal B., 63 AD3d 1056, 1057 [2009]; Matter of Joaquin J., 47 AD3d 630, 631 [2008]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of Faith J., an Infant. Suffolk County Department of Social Services, Respondent Kathleen J., (Proceeding No. 1.) In the Matter of Jason J., an Infant. Suffolk County Department of Social Services, Respondent Kathleen J., (Proceeding No. 2.)
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Jan 8, 2008.
47 A.D.3d 630
Cited by 12 opinions  |  Published

In two related child protective proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the mother appeals, as limited by her brief, from stated portions of an order of fact-finding and disposition of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Freundlich, J), entered October 27, 2006, which, after a hearing, inter alia, found that she neglected the subject children and required all visitation between her and the children to be supervised.

Ordered that the order of fact-finding and disposition is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The Family Court’s determination regarding issues of credibility is entitled to great weight on appeal (see Matter of Erich J., 22 AD3d 849, 850 [2005]). Here, the Family Court’s determination that the mother neglected the subject children is supported by a preponderance of the evidence, which demonstrated that the children’s physical, mental, or emotional condition was impaired or was in imminent danger of becoming impaired as a result of the mother’s bizarre and paranoid behavior (see Family Ct Act § 1046 [b] [i]; Matter of Angel Marie L., 5 AD3d 773 [2004]; Matter of Krewsean S., 273 AD2d 393 [2000]; Matter of Caress S., 250 AD2d 490 [1998]; Matter of Zariyasta S., 158 AD2d 45 [1990]; Matter of Danielle M., 151 AD2d 240 [1989]).

The mother’s remaining contentions are without merit. Skelos, J.P., Santucci, Lifson and Carni, JJ., concur.