Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1986

In re Tina H.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided October 27, 1986

123 A.D.2d 864; 507 N.Y.S.2d 653; 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 60978

Cases that cite this one

12 later published cases cite this decision.

Matter of Ruben G. (Claudia G.) (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
In re Samuel T. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1999)
In re Brandy J. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
Nassau County Department of Social Services v. Steven K. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1991)
In re Christina F. (N.Y. 1989)
In re Joanne P. (NYC Family Court 1989)
In re Erin G. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1988)
In re Nicole V. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1987)
In re Ryan D. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1987)
In re Mayra T. (New York Family Court 1987)
In re Christina F. (NYC Family Court 1987)
In re Smith (NYC Family Court 1986)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

In a child protective proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the petitioner Commissioner of the New York City Department of Social Services and the Law Guardian on behalf of the child appeal from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Queens County (Gilman, J.), dated June 5, 1985, which, at the close of the petitioner’s case at the fact-finding hearing, dismissed the petition.

Ordered that the order is reversed, without costs or disbursements, the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Queens County, for a new fact-finding hearing and determination, and the temporary order of protection originally dated October 25, 1984 is reinstated and extended pending that new hearing and determination.

The unsworn testimony of the child was sufficient to corroborate her out-of-court description and demonstration of the acts of sexual abuse committed by the respondent (see, Matter *865of Fawn S., 123 AD2d 871). The Family Court erred, therefore, in dismissing the petition for failure to make out a prima facie case. Lazer, J. P., Bracken, Niehoff and Hooper, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.