Won affirmance of order of derivative abuse on behalf of the afterborn child.
Matter of Baby Boy D. (Adanna C.), 144 AD3d 1026 (2nd Dept. 2016)
In this child abuse proceeding where I represented a child born 2 years after Family Court determined that the mother abused her then 19-month-old son who had suffered a fractured skull while in the mother’s care, the Second Department accepted my argument Family Court’s finding that she derivatively abused the subject child was supported by a preponderance of the evidence adduced at the fact-finding hearing (see Family Ct Act § 1046 [b] [i]). The Court accepted my argument that ACS demonstrated that the mother, who was diagnosed with paranoid personality disorder, failed to re-engage in therapy as directed by an April 2013 dispositional order until nearly 13 months later, shortly before the filing of the instant petition, and that the conduct that formed the basis of the most recent abuse finding was sufficiently proximate in time to this derivative abuse proceeding such that it can reasonably be concluded that the condition still exists Indeed, I had argued that the case planner supervisor assigned to the mother’s case testified at the fact-finding hearing that she spoke with the mother about the prior abuse finding and that the mother stated that “[s]he doesn’t believe that she did anything wrong,” or “that she’d do anything differently.”