AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

In the Matter of JOSEPH T., a Child Alleged to be Neglected. NASSAU COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, Appellant; ROSEANNE T., Respondent. In the Matter of MICHELLE T., a Child Alleged to be Neglected. NASSAU COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, Appellant; ROSEANNE T., Respondent.

Ordered that the order is modified by deleting the provision thereof granting that branch of the respondent's motion which was to preclude the petitioner from offering "any evidence gathered from or obtained as a result of a sealed report in this matter" and substituting therefor a provision granting that branch of the motion only to the extent of precluding the petitioner from offering the sealed report in this matter as evidence in the underlying neglect proceedings; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The State Office of Children and Family Services deemed "unfounded" allegations in a report to the New York State Child Abuse and Maltreatment Registry regarding the respondent and her two children, Joseph T. and Michelle T. Accordingly, the report was sealed in compliance with Social Services Law § 422 (5).

The petitioner was not barred from commencing and maintaining a Family Court Act article 10 proceeding against the subject of the report based on the same set of facts contained in the sealed report ( see Social Services Law § 422; § 424 [11]; Matter of Diane P., 110 AD2d 354). The provision in the order precluding the petitioner "from offering any evidence gathered from or obtained as a result of [the] sealed report in this matter" goes beyond the scope of Social Services Law § 422 (5) and is contrary to Social Services Law § 422 (11) and § 424 (1). Thus, we modify the order accordingly.

In light of our determination, we need not address the petitioner's remaining contentions.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

IN THE MATTER OF JOSEPH T
(Nov 14, 2005)