Matter of Cindy O. v Edna C.

Matter of Cindy O. v Edna C. 2013 NY Slip Op 04979 Decided on July 2, 2013 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on July 2, 2013
Friedman, J.P., Sweeny, DeGrasse, Richter, Feinman, JJ.
10511

[*1]In re Cindy O., Petitioner-Appellant,

v

Edna C., et al., Respondents-Respondents.




Andrew J. Baer, New York, for appellant.
Law Office of Rafael F. Andaluz, Bronx (Rafael F. Andaluz of
counsel), for respondents.

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (David Gilman, J.H.O.), entered on or about August 7, 2012, which, after a fact-finding hearing, dismissed the petitions for orders of protection against respondents, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that respondents, her mother and her uncle, committed acts that would constitute harassment in the second degree, menacing in the third degree, or disorderly conduct (Penal Law §§ 240.26[2], 120.15, 240.20; Family Court Act § 832). The evidence indicates that the parties had a single altercation at the entranceway to their apartment when petitioner returned in the late evening with an unknown man. During the incident, petitioner's uncle picked up a knife in the kitchen and told petitioner she could not come in with the man, while petitioner's mother blocked the door. The incident ended with the arrest of petitioner. Petitioner's testimony, which was not credited by the court, was in any event insufficient to establish any of the
alleged offenses (see Matter of Rafael F. v Pedro Pablo N., __AD3d__, 2013 NY Slip Op 03787 [1st Dept May 28 2013]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: JULY 2, 2013

CLERK