Matter of Cheyenne J. (Christian J.)

Matter of Cheyenne J. (Christian J.) 2013 NY Slip Op 00990 Decided on February 14, 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 February 14, 2013
Sweeny, J.P., Saxe, DeGrasse, Abdus-Salaam, Feinman, JJ. 9228-
9229

[*1]In re Cheyenne J., A Dependent Child Under the Age of Eighteen Years, etc.,

and

Christian J., Respondent-Appellant, Administration for Children's Services, Petitioner-Respondent, Tamek S., Respondent.




Richard L. Herzfeld, P.C., New York (Richard L. Herzfeld of
counsel), for appellant.
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York
(Elizabeth I. Freedman of counsel), for Administration for Children's
Services, respondent.
Tamara A. Steckler, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Patricia
Colella of counsel), attorney for the child.

Appeal from order of protection, Family Court, New York County (Susan Knipps, J.), entered on or about October 13, 2010, which, among other things, directed that respondent father stay away from the mother and her home, and refrain from communicating with her by any means, until December 1, 2010, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as moot. Appeal from permanency hearing order (same court and Judge), entered on or about December 2, 2009, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as abandoned.

Since the order of protection being challenged has expired by its own terms, the appeal is moot (see Matter of Louis N. [Dawn O.], 98 AD3d 918 [1st Dept 2012]; Matter of Brandon M. [Luis M.], 94 AD3d 520 [1st Dept 2012]). Were we to reach the merits, we would find that the Family Court's order was authorized by Family Court Act § 1056 in the context of a neglect proceeding based on allegations of domestic violence in the child's presence, and that appellant's [*2]evidentiary objection is unpreserved. Moreover, the mother's testimony corroborated the statements in the 18 domestic incident reports admitted into evidence.

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

ENTERED: FEBRUARY 14, 2013

CLERK