Stephanie WW, Matter of

Citation213 A.D.2d 818,623 N.Y.S.2d 404
PartiesIn the Matter of STEPHANIE "WW" 1 and Another, Children Alleged to be Neglected. Otsego County Department of Social Services, Respondent; Janet "WW", 1 Appellant.
Decision Date09 March 1995
CourtNew York Supreme Court Appellate Division

Cynthia Feathers, Saratoga Springs, for appellant.

Steven Ratner, Dept. of Social Services, Cooperstown, for respondent.

Before CARDONA, P.J., and MERCURE, CASEY, PETERS and SPAIN, JJ.

MERCURE, Justice.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Otsego County (Nydam, J.), entered January 11, 1994, which granted petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, to adjudicate respondent's children to be neglected.

As the result of the death of respondent's six-month-old daughter, Stephanie, on May 15, 1992, petitioner filed a petition under Family Court Act article 10 alleging that Stephanie and her two-year-old sister, Cassandra, were neglected children. Following fact-finding and dispositional hearings, Family Court made findings that both Stephanie and Cassandra were neglected children and an order was entered placing Cassandra in the custody of her grandmother for one year. Initially, we agree with respondent that Family Court erred in its finding with regard to Stephanie. In view of the underlying purpose of Family Court Act article 10 to "protect children from injury or mistreatment and to help safeguard their physical, mental, and emotional well-being" (Family Ct.Act § 1011; see, Matter of Charles "DD." [Bernard "EE."], 163 A.D.2d 744, 747, 558 N.Y.S.2d 720), we conclude that a neglect petition may not be brought on behalf of a deceased child (see, Matter of Lambert, 119 Misc.2d 326, 462 N.Y.S.2d 791; see also, Matter of Minter, 132 A.D.2d 701, 518 N.Y.S.2d 181; People v. Brennan, 33 A.D.2d 139, 141, 306 N.Y.S.2d 384 [Family Ct.Act former § 812, which then provided Family Court with exclusive jurisdiction over interspousal assaults, did not apply when one of the spouses had died].

We reject respondent's contention, however, that there was insufficient evidence to support Family Court's finding and disposition with regard to Cassandra. The fact of Stephanie's asphyxiation without discernible medical or physical cause while in respondent's exclusive care, coupled with testimony and documentary evidence concerning respondent's fabricated or exaggerated descriptions of the circumstances surrounding Stephanie's death, Stephanie's frequent hospital visits for reported medical problems that could not be substantiated by examination and test results, and the undisputed fact that respondent suffers from a mental disorder...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Yolanda D., Matter of
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • August 7, 1995
    ... ... in Family Court Act article 10, is designed to "bring to bear protective and rehabilitative services within the child's household" (Besharov, 1993 Supp Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons.Law of N.Y., Book 29A, Family Ct.Act § 1012, 1995 Pocket Part, at 80; see generally, Matter of Stephanie "WW", 213 A.D.2d 818, 623 N.Y.S.2d 404; Matter of Charles "DD" [Bernard EE], 163 A.D.2d 744, 558 N.Y.S.2d 720; People v. Kenyon, 46 A.D.2d 409, 362 N.Y.S.2d 644). Family Court Act § 1011 provides that the legislative purpose of the statute is to "establish procedures to help protect children ... ...
  • In re Melanie S.
    • United States
    • New York Family Court
    • June 23, 2010
  • In re A. P.
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • June 2, 2021
  • Daniella HH, Matter of
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • February 20, 1997
    ... ... the child Max and the reasons underlying that determination, I conclude that the Family Court erred when it failed to find that respondent posed an imminent threat to Daniella's "physical, mental or emotional condition" (see, Family Ct Act § 1012[f][i][B]; [h]; § 1046[a]; Matter of Stephanie WW. [Janet WW.], 213 A.D.2d 818, 623 N.Y.S.2d 404; Matter of Tammie Z., 105 A.D.2d 463, 480 N.Y.S.2d 786, affd 66 N.Y.2d 1, 494 N.Y.S.2d 686, 484 N.E.2d 1038) ...         Accordingly, I would modify that portion of the order which dismissed that portion of the petition brought pursuant ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT