The Administration for Children’s Services (ACS) filed an abuse petition, pursuant to Family Court Act against the respondent mother and the person legally responsible for the subject children, respondent R., with regard to the children of the respondent mother.
A New York Family Lawyer said that ACS alleged in their petition that a fifteen-month-old child was in the care and custody of respondent R. and that the toddler was returned to the respondent mother with two black eyes and swelling to his forehead. It was alleged that the toddler and his eleven-year-old sibling left Brooklyn with respondent R. to go to his home in New Jersey for the weekend. Later that same day, the younger child was brought to the hospital and was pronounced dead on arrival.
Significantly, a New York Custody Lawyer said that despite her brother and sister accompanying her to New Jersey when she learned of her child’s death, respondent mother chose to spend the night with respondent R. in his home, with eleven-year-old Sheila who was present at the time of Angel’s death, knowing R. was a suspect for the homicide of her son that day.
ACS further alleged that despite knowing of these injuries and even documenting these injuries with a camera on her cell phone, the respondent mother failed to seek any medical attention. ACS effectuated an emergency removal of the surviving children upon the death of the toddler. Subsequently, respondent mother gave birth to another baby. ACS sought for the child’s custody. A Nassau County Family Court Lawyer said the Court determined that the temporary removal of the infant was necessary to avoid imminent risk to this child’s life and health.
Thereafter, ACS filed an instant motion for summary judgment, alleging that there are no genuine triable issues of fact, and requesting an order finding that the subject children are abused and/or neglect. Summary judgment is useful in expediting the just resolution of a legal dispute and in conserving the overburdened judicial resources. When there is no genuine issue to be resolved at trial, the case should be summarily decided. Respondent mother argues that there are triable issues of fact as to where the bruises were on the child.
The Court granted the motion for summary judgment.
The Court ruled that the subject children were abused and/or neglected, pursuant to the Family Court Act, as a result the respondent mother’s actions and poor judgment, where she allowed fifteen-month-old toddler with his eleven-year-old sibling to return to the home of respondent R.
A Queens Custody Lawyer said under the Family Court Act in defining “abused child,” it is sufficient for finding of abuse that there be protracted impairment of emotional health or substantial risk thereof; it is actual or potential impact on child as supposed to per se seriousness of the injury, that forms predicate for abuse.
According to the Court, respondent mother’s argument that there are triable issues of fact as to where the bruises were on the child is not sufficient to raise a genuine and material triable issue of fact and will not defeat entry of summary judgment. The Court opined that under the totality of facts and circumstances, the respondent mother’s testimony alone is sufficient proof that she allowed to be created a substantial risk of physical injury which would be likely to cause death or serious physical injury to the infant by allowing him to return with the person for the weekend where he was injured only days before. Accordingly, this Court finds that the respondent mother abused the child pursuant to Family Court Act.
The Court concluded, under the totality of these facts and circumstances, that the respondent mother demonstrates serious fundamental flaws in her understanding of the duties of parenthood that places any child in her care at risk of being neglected. Thus, the Court found that as a result of the mother’s knowledge, actions, and poor parental judgment that resulted in the death of fifteen-month-old child, that the remaining children, are derivatively neglected children
Let you and your loved ones be protected by the cloak of rights provided by law. Stephen Bilkis and Associates with its New York Child Custody Lawyer has offices conveniently situated in within the New York Metropolitan area including Corona, New York.