ORDERED that the appeal from so much of the order of disposition dated January 11, 2000, as placed the child in the custody of the Commissioner of Social Services is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as the period of placement has expired; and it is further,
ORDERED that the order of disposition is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs or disbursements.
The appeal from so much of the order of disposition as directed that the child be placed in the care of the Commissioner of Social Services must be dismissed as academic, because that order expired by its own terms on February 17, 2000. Nevertheless, the adjudication of neglect constitutes a permanent and significant stigma which might indirectly affect the appellant's status in any future proceedings. Therefore, the appeal from so much of the order of disposition as determined that the appellant neglected the subject child is not academic (see, Matter of H. Children, 276 A.D.2d 485).
Contrary to the appellant's contention, the testimony adduced at the hearing was sufficient to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that he neglected the subject child by virtue of his abuse of alcohol (see, Family Ct Act 1046[a][iii]; Matter of Scott M. v. Janna C., 237 A.D.2d 603, 604; Matter of Corrine B. v. Margaret D., 221 A.D.2d 439; Matter of William T., 185 A.D.2d 413).
SANTUCCI, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, FLORIO and CRANE, JJ., concur.