Matter of Domynque F.

Matter of Domynque F. 2009 NY Slip Op 03722 [62 AD3d 697] May 5, 2009 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, July 1, 2009

In the Matter of Domynque F. Administration for Children's Services, Appellant; Sean C., Respondent. Steven Banks, Nonparty Appellant. (Proceeding No. 1.) In the Matter of Deyon C. Administration for Children's Services, Appellant; Sean C., Respondent. (Proceeding No. 2.) In the Matter of Jordon C. Administration for Children's Services, Appellant; Sean C., Respondent. (Proceeding No. 3.)

—[*1] Steven Banks, New York, N.Y. (Tamara A. Steckler and Claire V. Merkine of counsel), attorney for the child Domynyque F., named here as Domynque F., appellant.

Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Kristin M. Helmers and Suan B. Eisner of counsel), for the petitioner-appellant.

Toba Beth Stutz, Jamaica, N.Y., for respondent.

Dean Kusakabe, Forest Hills, N.Y., attorney for the children Deyon C. and Jordon C.

In three related child protective proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Family Court, Queens County (Friedman, J.), dated March 21, 2008, which, after a fact-finding hearing, dismissed the petitions, and the attorney for the child Domynyque F., named here as Domynque F., separately appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much the same order as dismissed the petition asserted on that child's behalf.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Family Court Act § 1046 (b) (i) requires a finding of abuse or neglect of a child to be supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see Matter of Philip M., 82 NY2d 238, 243-244 [1993]; Matter of Tammie Z., 66 NY2d 1, 3 [1985]; Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. v Lorenzo M., 239 AD2d 498, 498 [1997]). Deference should be accorded to the Family Court's assessments of the credibility of witnesses, although an appellate court is free to make its own credibility assessments. Under the circumstances of this case, we cannot say that the Family Court's findings were not supported by a preponderance of the evidence. Skelos, J.P., Fisher, Miller and Eng, JJ., concur.