In the Matter of David "J"
Jun 16, 1994OUTCOME: Court found that children were properly returned
The Department had filed a neglect petition against the parents of three children. In the midst of the proceeding the parents left the jurisdiction with their three children. The court granted the De ... partment temporary custody of the children, who were located in Montana and returned to Schenectady, NY. Thereafter the parents moved the court for return of the children to their custody. This application was granted by the Family Court and the Department appealed the decision. The split decision of the Appellate Court found that it was not willing to overturn the findings of the lower court Judge who had declared at the beginning of his decision that he had "a unique opportunity to evaluate the demeanor and credibility of each witness". The lengthy and strong dissent of Judge Peters argued that there had been not evidence produced in the hearing which showed that the parent's would be likely to comply with a new order of supervision when they had already failed to comply with an order of supervision, and had fled the jurisdiction of the court . Judge Peters further argued that the record was replete with examples of the parent's refusal to follow the recommendations of professionals regarding the medical care of the children. She noted that the record contained proof of an episode of violence by the father against one of the children and that this child had not attended school for months. She noted that the oldest child was never allowed to play outside and that he was not allowed to have and friends visit him in the home. She notes that the oldest child is clearly the target child of the family. Judge Peters found that much of the parent's testimony was unbelievable and that the children in her opinion were at imminent risk in the parental household.
