Matter of A.D. (K.D.)

<div>Matter of A.D. (K.D.) - 2026 NY Slip Op 02033

<div> skip to main content </div>

<div> <p>It appears you are using Adblock. Please disable Adblock to best experience our website.</p> </div>

<div> <header> <div> <img src="/reporter/images/nys-logo-white.svg" alt=""> </div> <div> <span title="Law Reporting Bureau Home Page">Law Reporting <br>Bureau <span></span></span> <span>Thomas J.K. Smith, State Reporter</span> <nav> Court Decisions Resources About </nav> </div> <div> <img src="/reporter/images/lrb-seal.png" alt=""> </div> </header> </div>

<nav> <ol> <li>Home</li> <li>All Court Decisions</li> <li>Decisions</li> </ol> </nav> <div> <div> <h1>Matter of A.D. (K.D.)</h1> <p>2026 NY Slip Op 02033</p> <p>April 2, 2026</p> <p>Appellate Division, First Department</p> <p>Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.</p> <p>This decision is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.</p> </div> <div> <p>In the Matter of A.D., And Others., Children Under Eighteen Years of Age, etc., K.D. Respondent-Appellant, Administration for Children's Services, Petitioner-Respondent.</p> </div> <p>Decided and Entered: April 02, 2026</p> <p>Docket No. NN-00050-23, NN-00051-23, NN-00052-23 , NN-00053-23|Appeal No. 6251|Case No. 2024-03351|</p> <p>Before: Manzanet-Daniels, J.P., Mendez, Pitt-Burke, Higgitt, Hagler, JJ. </p> <div> <p>Daniel X Robinson, New York, for appellant.</p> <p>Muriel Goode-Trufant, Corporation Counsel, New York (Lauren O'Brien of counsel), for respondent.</p> <p>Dawne A. Mitchell, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Polixene Petrakopoulos of counsel), attorney for the children.</p> </div> <span>[*1]</span> <p>Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Grace Oboma-Layat, J.), entered on or about May 6, 2024, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, determined, after a fact-finding hearing, that respondent was a person legally responsible for the children D.A. and K.D., neglected K.D. and the child S.D., and derivatively neglected D.A. and the child A.D., unanimously affirmed, without costs.</p> <p>Family Court providently determined that respondent was a person legally responsible for K.D. and D.A. during the relevant period (<i>see Matter of Yolanda D.</i>, 88 NY2d 790, 796 [1996]). Respondent was in a romantic relationship with their mother for a period of one and a half years and is the father of their half-sibling, S.D. (<i>see Matter of Samantha M.</i>, 56 AD3d 299, 300-301 [1st Dept 2008], <i>lv denied</i> 11 NY3d 716 [2009]). Respondent also frequently stayed in the home with the mother and the children, provided for the family financially, and took the children to school and on family outings (<i>see Matter of Matthew C. [Joshua L.]</i>, 183 AD3d 457, 457-458 [1st Dept 2020]; <i>Matter of Jayline R. [Jose M.].</i>, 110 AD3d 419, 420 [1st Dept 2013]).</p> <p>A preponderance of the evidence supports the finding that respondent neglected KD. and S.D. by committing an act of domestic violence against the mother in their presence (<i>see Matter of J.A. [Jermaine M.]</i>, 233 AD3d 428, 428 [1st Dept 2024]; <i>Matter of Jermaine K.R. [Jermaine R.]</i>, 176 AD3d 648, 649 [1st Dept 2019]). Respondent brandished a firearm and physically assaulted the mother in close proximity to the children, thereby placing their emotional well-being at imminent risk of harm (<i>see Matter of J.A.</i>, 233 AD3d at 428; <i>Matter of Jermaine K.R.</i>, 176 AD3d at 649). The mother also testified that, after the incident, K.D. was very distressed and appeared scared, which is sufficient to show that his emotional well-being had been impaired by the altercation (<i>see e.g. Matter of Jermaine K.R.</i>, 176 AD3d at 649).</p> <p>The evidence supported the finding of derivative neglect on behalf of A.D. and D.A. because respondent's actions demonstrated such an impaired level of parental judgment as to create a substantial risk of harm to any child in his care (<i>see Matter of Matthew C. [Joshua L.]</i>, 183 AD3d 457, 458 [1st Dept 2020]; <i>Matter of Saphire R. [Christopher R.]</i>, 219 AD3d 730, 732 [2d Dept 2023]). The fact that D.A. and AD. were not present in the home when the incident occurred does not preclude a finding of derivative neglect (<i>see Matter of Kaylin P. [Derval S.]</i>, 159 AD3d 658, 659 [1st Dept 2018]). </p><p>THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.</p> <p>ENTERED: April 2, 2026</p> </div>

<div> <footer> <div> <p>Court Decisions</p> All Court Decisions Official Reports Service Bound Volumes Decision Search </div> <div> <p>Resources</p> RSS Feeds Style Manual Citation Tools Opinion Formatting &amp; Privacy Guidelines Opinion Selection Criteria Legal Research Portal Site Index </div> <div> <p>About</p> About the Law Reporting Bureau About our Operations Contact Us Twitter </div> <div> <p>Quick Contact Info</p> <p>17 Lodge Street</p> <p>Albany, NY 12207</p> <p>Phone: (518) 453-6900</p> </div> </footer> </div> <div> <p>Links to or from other sites do not signify endorsement or relationship with them.</p> </div>

</div>