Admin. for Children's Servs. v. Irina B. (In re Kayla B.)

• Decision Date: 28 November 2018
• Docket Number: 2017–10597,Docket Nos. N–14351–15, N–14352–15, N–14353–15, N–14354–15, N–14355–15
• Citation: 86 N.Y.S.3d 739 (Mem),166 A.D.3d 967
• Parties: In the MATTER OF KAYLA B. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, Petitioner-Respondent; v. Irina B. (Anonymous), Appellant, et al., Respondent. (Proceeding No. 1) In the Matter of Rebekah B. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, Petitioner-Respondent; v. Irina B. (Anonymous), Appellant, et al., Respondent. (Proceeding No. 2) In the Matter of Joseph B. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, Petitioner-Respondent; v. Irina B. (Anonymous), Appellant, et al., Respondent. (Proceeding No. 3) In the Matter of Esther B. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, Petitioner-Respondent; v. Irina B. (Anonymous), Appellant, et al., Respondent. (Proceeding No. 4) In the Matter of Hannah B. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, Petitioner-Respondent; v. Irina B. (Anonymous), Appellant, et al., Respondent. (Proceeding No. 5)
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

166 A.D.3d 967

86 N.Y.S.3d 739 (Mem)

In the MATTER OF KAYLA B. (Anonymous).

Administration for Children's Services, Petitioner-Respondent;

v.Irina B. (Anonymous), Appellant, et al., Respondent. (Proceeding No. 1)

In the Matter of Rebekah B. (Anonymous).

Administration for Children's Services, Petitioner-Respondent;

v.Irina B. (Anonymous), Appellant, et al., Respondent. (Proceeding No. 2)

In the Matter of Joseph B. (Anonymous).

Administration for Children's Services, Petitioner-Respondent;

v.Irina B. (Anonymous), Appellant, et al., Respondent. (Proceeding No. 3)

In the Matter of Esther B. (Anonymous).

Administration for Children's Services, Petitioner-Respondent;

v.Irina B. (Anonymous), Appellant, et al., Respondent. (Proceeding No. 4)

In the Matter of Hannah B. (Anonymous).

Administration for Children's Services, Petitioner-Respondent;

v.Irina B. (Anonymous), Appellant, et al., Respondent. (Proceeding No. 5)

2017–10597

Docket Nos. N–14351–15, N–14352–15, N–14353–15, N–14354–15, N–14355–15

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Submitted—November 1, 2018

November 28, 2018

Irina B., Brooklyn, NY, appellant pro se.

Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Jane L. Gordon and Carolyn Walther of counsel), for respondent.

The Legal Aid Society, New York, N.Y. (Dawne A. Mitchell, John A. Newbery, and Kaitlin Andrews of counsel), attorney for the child Kayla B.

Larry S. Bachner, New York, NY, attorney for the child Rebekah B.

Richard P. Reyes, New York, NY, attorney for the children Joseph B. and Hannah B.

Virginia Geiss, Brooklyn, NY, attorney for the child Esther B.

LEONARD B. AUSTIN, J.P., SYLVIA O. HINDS–RADIX, JOSEPH J. MALTESE, LINDA CHRISTOPHER, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

In related proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the mother appeals from an order of fact-finding of the Family Court, Kings County (Erik S. Pitchal, J.), dated August 25, 2017. The order of fact-finding, insofar as appealed from, after a fact-finding hearing, found that the mother neglected the children Kayla B., Rebekah B., and Esther B., and derivatively neglected the children Joseph B. and Hannah B.

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

The petitioner commenced these proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, alleging, inter alia, that the mother neglected the children Kayla B., Rebekah B., and Esther B., and derivatively neglected the children Joseph B. and Hannah B. Following a fact-finding hearing, the Family Court found that a preponderance of the evidence established that the mother neglected Kayla, Rebekah, and Esther, and derivatively neglected Joseph and Hannah. The mother appeals.

At a fact-finding hearing in a child protective proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the petitioner has the burden of establishing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the subject child has been abused or neglected (see Family Ct. Act § 1046[b][i] ; Matter of Tammie Z., 66 N.Y.2d 1, 3, 494 N.Y.S.2d 686, 484 N.E.2d 1038 ; Matter of Brianna M. [Corbert G.], 152 A.D.3d 600, 58 N.Y.S.3d 534 ; Matter of Desiree P. [Michael H.], 149 A.D.3d 841, 49 N.Y.S.3d 924 ). The Family Court's findings with respect to credibility are entitled to great weight (see Matter of Brianna M. [Corbert G.], 152 A.D.3d at 601, 58 N.Y.S.3d 534 ; Matter of Monica M. [Mary M.], 151 A.D.3d 1705, 56 N.Y.S.3d 739 ; Matter of Jamel T. [Gemayel T.], 120 A.D.3d 504, 989 N.Y.S.2d 908 ).

Here, a preponderance of the evidence adduced at the fact-finding hearing established that the mother neglected Kayla, Rebekah, and Esther by using excessive corporal punishment (see Family Ct. Act 1012[f][i][B] ; Matter of Michele S. [Yi S.], 157 A.D.3d 551, 67 N.Y.S.3d 628 ; Matter of Genesis F. [Xiomaris S.], 121 A.D.3d 526, 994 N.Y.S.2d 341 ; Matter of James S. [Kathleen S.], 88 A.D.3d 1006, 931 N.Y.S.2d 524 ). Moreover, since the mother's conduct toward Kayla, Rebekah, and Esther demonstrated a fundamental defect in her understanding of parental duties relating to the care of children,...