In re Ja'Vaughn Kiaymonie S.

• Decision Date: 03 January 2017
• Citation: 146 A.D.3d 422,44 N.Y.S.3d 400,2017 N.Y. Slip Op. 00029
• Parties: In re JA'VAUGHN KIAYMONIE S., A Dependent Child Under Eighteen Years of Age, etc., Nathaniel S., Respondent–Appellant, Administration for Children's Services, Petitioner–Respondent, Antoinette S., Respondent.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

146 A.D.3d 422

44 N.Y.S.3d 400

2017 N.Y. Slip Op. 00029

In re JA'VAUGHN KIAYMONIE S., A Dependent Child Under Eighteen Years of Age, etc.,

Nathaniel S., Respondent–Appellant,

Administration for Children's Services, Petitioner–Respondent,

Antoinette S., Respondent.

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

Jan. 3, 2017.

Neal D. Futerfas, White Plains, for appellant.

Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Elizabeth S. Natrella of counsel), for respondent.

Tamara A. Steckler, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Susan Clement of counsel), attorney for the child.

SAXE, J.P., MOSKOWITZ, GISCHE, KAHN, GESMER, JJ.

Order of fact-finding, Family Court, New York County (Clark V. Richardson, J.), entered on or about May 19, 2015, which determined, after a hearing, that respondent father had neglected the subject child, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Although Family Court should have stated the grounds for its determination (see Family Ct. Act § 1051 ), there is no need to dismiss the petition, because this Court has the authority to state the grounds (see Matter of Poli K., 34 A.D.3d 354, 355, 824 N.Y.S.2d 283 [1st Dept.2006], lv. denied 8 N.Y.3d 809, 834 N.Y.S.2d 90, 865 N.E.2d 1257 [2007] ).

Family Court's determination was supported by a preponderance of the evidence showing that the father had neglected the child because he knew or should have known that respondent mother was abusing narcotics while she was pregnant with the child, but failed to take any steps to stop her drug use (see Family Ct. Act §§ 1046[b][i] ; 1012[f][i][B]; Matter of Ashante M., 19 A.D.3d 249, 249, 797 N.Y.S.2d 68 [1st Dept.2005] ; Matter of Niviya K. [Alfonzo M.], 89 A.D.3d 1027, 1028, 933 N.Y.S.2d 356 [2d Dept.2011] ).

We have considered the father's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.