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
Dec 22, 1995

In re Najam M.

The Family Court's dismissal of a child abuse petition, brought by the Commissioner of Social Services and the Law Guardian for Najam M. against her respondent father, was reversed on appeal. The appellate court reinstated the petition and entered a finding of sexual abuse, remanding the case for further proceedings. Expert medical testimony from Dr. Jamie Hoffman Rosenfeld, a child abuse specialist, detailed physical abnormalities in the child consistent with chronic manipulation and sexual abuse, which she affirmed could not be self-inflicted. The child's consistent allegations of abuse by her father, made to multiple individuals, further supported the medical findings. The court determined that the petitioner had established a prima facie case of child abuse, which the parents' explanation failed to rebut.

Child AbuseSexual AbuseFamily CourtAppellate ReversalExpert Medical TestimonyHymenal InjuryPrima Facie CaseBurden of ProofChild InterviewParental Explanation Rebuttal
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 31, 2009

In re Selena R.

The Family Court of Bronx County issued an order of disposition finding a father guilty of sexually abusing his son, Tyler T., derivatively abusing Selena R., and neglecting both children. The court released the children to the mother's custody under strict supervision and restricted the father's contact with them. The appellate court modified the order, vacating the finding of neglect due to excessive corporal punishment, but affirmed the remaining aspects of the decision. The sexual abuse finding was corroborated by a social worker's testimony detailing the children's symptomatic behavior, including age-inappropriate sexual knowledge. However, the claim of excessive corporal punishment was not supported by a preponderance of the evidence.

sexual abusechild neglectderivative abusecorporal punishmentfamily court lawappellate procedureevidence sufficiencysocial worker testimonychild welfareparental rights
References
3
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 31, 1996

In re Keisha McL.

This case involves an order of disposition from the Family Court, Bronx County, entered on July 31, 1996. The order placed the subject children with the Commissioner for the Administration of Children’s Services for 12 months and directed their foster care agency to commence a termination of parental rights proceeding. This action was taken based on a fact-finding determination that the respondent had sexually abused two of the children. The children's out-of-court statements regarding the abuse were cross-corroborated by each other and further supported by consistent repetitions to their foster mother, a psychologist, and a social worker. Expert testimony confirmed the children's knowledge of sexual acts and symptomatic behavioral changes. The court inferred that the touching was for sexual gratification due to the absence of an innocent explanation. The order was unanimously affirmed.

Child Sexual AbuseFamily CourtTermination of Parental RightsChild WelfareExpert TestimonyCorroborated StatementsChild Protection ServicesDispositional OrderSexual Gratification InferenceBehavioral Changes
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Swift v. Swift

This case involves an appeal by the petitioner-mother from a Family Court order in Broome County, which granted the respondent-father unsupervised visitation rights with their two children. The petitioner alleged sexual abuse of their daughter, Sarah, by the respondent, leading to a temporary order for supervised visitation. Despite two reports to the State Child Abuse Hotline, which were deemed unfounded after investigation, the petitioner sought termination of visitation. The Family Court ultimately found that the petitioner failed to sustain her burden of proof regarding the sexual abuse allegations, a decision which the appellate court affirmed. The appellate court deferred to the trial court's credibility findings and its reasons for rejecting corroborating "validation evidence," noting concerns about the petitioner's influence, the social worker's inexperience, and the context of contested custody litigation.

Child VisitationSexual Abuse AllegationsCredibility FindingsHearsay CorroborationValidation EvidenceAppellate ReviewFamily Court OrderParental HostilityChild Custody LitigationExpert Testimony
References
3
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
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 12, 1992

In re Jamie C.

This case involves an appeal from a Family Court order in Broome County, which granted a petitioner's application to adjudicate the respondents' children as abused and/or neglected. The Family Court had found the father, James D., sexually and physically abused his daughter Jamie C. and neglected all four children, while the mother, Barbara C., sexually abused Jamie and neglected all four. On appeal, the finding of sexual abuse against the mother was reversed due to insufficient corroborating evidence and Jamie C.'s conflicting sworn testimony. However, the findings of the father's sexual and physical abuse, and both parents' neglect stemming from chronic alcohol abuse and violent behavior, were affirmed based on Jamie's credible testimony and other evidence presented.

Family LawChild AbuseChild NeglectSexual AbusePhysical AbuseAlcohol AbuseCredibility of TestimonyCorroboration of EvidenceAppellate ReviewFamily Court Act
References
1
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

In re Vincent I.

Petitioner initiated a Family Court Act article 10 proceeding in May 1991, alleging respondent sexually abused his son, Vincent, and abused/neglected his stepchildren, Benjamin and Bradford. Family Court found respondent sexually abused Vincent, relying on Vincent's out-of-court statements corroborated by expert validation testimony from Carol George. George, along with child protective worker Paula Herman, refuted claims of coaching, testifying that Vincent's behaviors were consistent with child sexual abuse syndrome. Following findings, Family Court ordered respondent's supervision, a mental health evaluation, and counseling; respondent subsequently appealed. The appellate court affirmed the Family Court's order, concluding that the findings of abuse and neglect were supported by a preponderance of the evidence.

child abusesexual abusechild neglectFamily CourtTompkins Countycorroborationexpert testimonyout-of-court statementspsychological evaluationjudicial discretion
References
4
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

In re Miranda UU.

This case concerns an appeal from a Family Court order in Tioga County which dismissed a petition to declare Miranda UU., a child, abused by her stepfather (the respondent). Miranda alleged sexual abuse by the respondent, stating he digitally penetrated her and exposed himself. The case was complicated by Miranda having been previously sexually molested by her half-brother. During the initial hearing, Miranda's statements were presented through her mother, a caseworker, and a therapist, supported by validation evidence. The respondent denied the allegations, and his stepdaughter contradicted Miranda's claim of observing other abuse. Two clinical psychologists also testified against the abuse claims. The Family Court found that the petitioner failed to establish abuse by a fair preponderance of the evidence, citing a lack of physical evidence, the impact of prior abuse on behavioral symptoms, doubts about Miranda's credibility, and conflicting expert opinions. The appellate court affirmed the Family Court's decision, emphasizing that the lower court's credibility determinations and weighing of evidence were entitled to deference.

Child AbuseSexual AbuseFamily Court Act Article 10Credibility AssessmentAppellate ReviewEvidentiary StandardsPreponderance of EvidenceMedical Examination FindingsExpert Witness TestimonyValidation Evidence
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 3,004 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