CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 25, 2000

In re Hadja B.

The Family Court, New York County's order of disposition, entered on May 25, 2000, which placed a child with a petitioner agency for 12 months due to a finding of neglect, was unanimously affirmed. The court found that the respondent inflicted excessive corporal punishment on the child, a finding supported by the child’s sworn, in-camera testimony and prior consistent statements. The testimony described respondent repeatedly hitting the child with various objects, causing injuries. The Family Court's credibility findings were upheld, and the in-camera examination of the child, with respondent's attorney present, was deemed proper given an affidavit indicating the respondent's abuse compromised the child’s ability to testify clearly in their presence.

Child NeglectCorporal PunishmentChild AbuseFamily CourtCredibilityIn-camera TestimonyAgency PlacementChild WelfareExcessive ForceWitness Testimony
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 30, 1998

In re Jennifer V.

The New York County Family Court's order of disposition, which placed a child in a protective agency's custody for 12 months due to a finding of neglect, was unanimously affirmed on appeal. The finding of neglect was supported by a preponderance of evidence, demonstrating the infliction of excessive corporal punishment against the child and acts of violence against the child's mother in the child's presence. The appellate court found the evidence sufficiently corroborated and rejected the argument that the lack of eyewitness testimony for corporal punishment warranted reversal, emphasizing the respondent's violent tendencies posed an imminent danger to the child. Furthermore, the disposition was justified by a psychiatric report on the respondent and social worker testimony, which indicated the respondent's profound indifference to the effects of his behavior on the child, thus warranting the transfer of custody and a mandate for psychiatric counseling to address his violent tendencies and improve his parental suitability.

Child NeglectCorporal PunishmentDomestic ViolenceChild CustodyParental FitnessPsychiatric CounselingFamily Court ActAppellate ReviewEvidence SufficiencyImminent Danger
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Dara R.

In a child abuse proceeding initiated by the Commissioner of Social Services, the petitioner appealed an order from the Family Court, Richmond County, which dismissed the petition and vacated a temporary order of protection against the respondent. The child, aged seven, testified about alleged abuse by her father, supported by a pediatrician's findings of vaginal scars and testimonies from a psychologist and social workers. The respondent denied the allegations, asserting fabrication by the child's mother and presenting corroborating family testimony. The appellate court reversed the Family Court's decision, reinstated the temporary order of protection, and remitted the case for a new fact-finding hearing. This further hearing is to include examinations of the child by court-appointed physicians and psychiatrists, acknowledging sufficient evidence of abuse while not conclusively identifying the respondent as the perpetrator.

Child abuseFamily Court Act Article 10Temporary order of protectionFact-finding hearingAppellate reviewRemandChild testimonyMedical examinationPsychological evaluationVisitation dispute
References
0
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 03326
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 18, 2024

Matter of D.F. (Erica L.)

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed the Family Court, Bronx County's finding that the mother, Erica L., neglected her child, D.F., by inflicting excessive corporal punishment. The child's consistent in-court testimony, corroborated by statements to emergency and ACS workers, detailed multiple incidents of physical abuse with various objects, causing pain and fear. The court found the child's testimony credible and the mother's incredible. The decision emphasized that sworn testimony alone is competent evidence of abuse, even without physical injury, and that the punishments were not justified as reasonable discipline. Procedural arguments by the mother regarding pleadings and hearsay were unpreserved or found unavailing.

child neglectcorporal punishmentphysical abuseFamily Court Actcredibility determinationappellate reviewevidentiary standardschild testimonyAdministration for Children's Servicesparental rights
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re S. Children

This child protective proceeding was initiated by The Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Children against a father accused of sexually abusing his young son, Scott, in the presence of his older son, Jonathan. When Jonathan, an alleged eyewitness, became reluctant to testify in his father's presence, the petitioner requested his testimony be taken in camera. The court denied this application, citing the respondent's due process right to confront witnesses and finding insufficient evidence of a pathological impact on the child. The court emphasized the absence of statutory provisions for in camera testimony in such cases and suggested legislative consideration for future procedures to balance child protection with parental rights.

Child Protective ProceedingIn Camera TestimonyDue Process RightsRight to ConfrontationChild WitnessSexual Abuse AllegationsFamily Court ActWitness ReluctanceBalancing of InterestsExclusion of Respondent
References
6
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 00066 [179 AD3d 427]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 07, 2020

Matter of Katherine U. (Jose U.)

The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed a Family Court order finding Jose U. sexually abused his child, Katherine U., and dismissed the appeal from the fact-finding order. The court upheld the use of closed-circuit television for the child's testimony, balancing the father's due process rights with the child's emotional well-being, as contemporaneous cross-examination by counsel was permitted. An affidavit from the child's social worker sufficiently established that in-court testimony would cause emotional harm. Furthermore, Jose U.'s prior criminal convictions for predatory sexual assault, rape, incest, and sexual abuse, involving the child, collaterally estopped him from contesting the abuse allegations in the family court petition.

Child abuseSexual abuseFamily LawAppellate ProcedureDue ProcessChild TestimonyClosed-circuit televisionCollateral EstoppelCriminal ConvictionEvidence Admissibility
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 17, 1968

In re Male Child Wilkov

In a contested adoption proceeding, the natural mother appealed an order from the Family Court, Suffolk County, dated December 17, 1968. The order had concluded that she abandoned her infant child, dismissed her application for the child's return, rejected her objection to the proposed adoption, and directed the court clerk to proceed with the adoption application. The appellate court affirmed the order, despite noting an error by the trial court regarding a social worker's communication. The trial court mistakenly believed the natural mother spoke with a hospital social worker, when in fact, the social worker had only conversed with the child's grandmother. However, the appellate court found that there was ample independent evidence to support the abandonment finding, irrespective of this factual dispute.

Adoption LawChild AbandonmentFamily Court AppealParental RightsSuffolk County Family CourtAppellate AffirmationSocial Worker TestimonyFactual ErrorEvidentiary SupportChild Custody
References
1
Case No. 02-15-00176-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 19, 2015

in the Interest of A.P., a Child

This is an appeal from a trial court's order terminating the parental rights of Mother and Father to their child, Timmy (A.P.). Mother and Father challenged the termination, arguing issues of involuntary relinquishment, ineffective assistance of counsel, and that termination was not in the child's best interest. The Department of Family and Protective Services presented evidence of parental drug use, criminal history, mental health issues, and an unstable home environment, leading to the child's removal multiple times. Both parents eventually signed affidavits of voluntary relinquishment of parental rights, which they later attempted to revoke, claiming duress or ineffective assistance. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, finding no abuse of discretion in denying new trials and that the signed relinquishment affidavits were sufficient to support the best interest finding for the child.

Parental Rights TerminationChild CustodyAffidavit of RelinquishmentIneffective Assistance of CounselDuressChild Best InterestDrug UseCriminal HistoryMental HealthAppellate Review
References
31
Case No. 2016 NY Slip Op 02654
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 06, 2016

Matter of Dayannie I. M. (Roger I. M.)

The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed a Family Court order which found Roger I.M. abused and neglected his daughter, Eyllen I.M., and derivatively abused his other children: Dayannie I.M., Hillary I.M., Keyri I.M., and Jackzenny I.M. The court found that the Suffolk County Department of Social Services presented sufficient evidence, including Eyllen's consistent out-of-court statements, expert testimony, and Roger I.M.'s written confession of sexual abuse. The Appellate Division upheld the Family Court's credibility assessment, rejecting the appellant's and the children's mother's disputes. The court also affirmed the derivative abuse findings for the other children, noting that a child's recantation does not necessarily invalidate prior abuse allegations, especially when pressured or if there is expert testimony indicating a false recantation.

Child AbuseChild NeglectFamily LawAppellate ReviewSexual AbuseCredibilityRecantationExpert TestimonyParental RightsSuffolk County Family Court
References
26
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

People v. Guce

The defendant appealed a judgment convicting him of rape, sodomy, sexual abuse, incest, and endangering the welfare of a child. The appeal challenged the Supreme Court's decision to allow the child victims to testify via live, two-way, closed-circuit television, with the defendant remaining outside the room, citing their vulnerability and potential for severe emotional harm. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, finding that these procedures were constitutional and supported by clear and convincing evidence of extraordinary circumstances and the children's vulnerability. The court also found no error in allowing sworn and unsworn testimony, the use of anatomically correct dolls, or the admissibility of expert testimony regarding child sexual abuse syndrome, distinguishing the case from previous rulings.

Child Sexual AbuseVulnerable WitnessesConfrontation ClauseClosed-Circuit Television TestimonyWitness TraumaAppellate ReviewSixth AmendmentFourteenth AmendmentExpert TestimonyPosttraumatic Stress Syndrome
References
10
Showing 1-10 of 4,961 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational