New York City Department of Social Services v. Oscar C.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
PlZZUTO, J.
The question to be answered is whether the Family Court erred in applying the "preponderance of the evidence” stan*282dard of proof in its fact-finding phase of this Family Court Act article 10 child neglect proceeding (which involved two children of Eskimo heritage), while applying the more stringent "clear and convincing” evidence standard in the dispositional phase. The issue presented appears to be one of first impression in this State. We hold that the Family Court properly applied the dual burden of proof.
This case has a history in the Queens County Family…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Santosky v. KramerSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Maryland v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Wisconsin Public Intervenor v. MortierSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Chicago & North Western Transportation Co. v. Kalo Brick & Tile Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
- In re Tammie Z.New York Court of Appeals · 1985
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- People v. WyattAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- Valerie M. v. Arizona Department of Economic SecurityArizona Supreme Court · 2009
- In Re Oklahoma Uniform Jury Instructions for Juvenile CasesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2005
- In re the Adoption of Baby Girl S.New York Surrogate's Court · 1999
- People v. JonyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2023
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.