Matter of Alexander C. v Juan C.
2006 NY Slip Op 05008 [30 AD3d 593]
Decided on June 20, 2006
Appellate Division, Second 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 June 20, 2006
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
STEPHEN G. CRANE, J.P.
DAVID S. RITTER
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
PETER B. SKELOS, JJ.
2005-07991 DECISION & ORDER

[*1]In the Matter of Alexander C. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, appellant;

and

Juan C. (Anonymous), respondent. (Proceeding No. 1)



In the Matter of Brenda C. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, appellant;

and

Juan C. (Anonymous), respondent. (Proceeding No. 2)



In the Matter of Juan Carlos C. (Anonymous). Suffolk County Department of Social Services, appellant;

and

Juan C. (Anonymous), respondent. (Proceeding No. 3) (Docket Nos. N-00066-05, N-00067-05, N-00068-05)





Christine Malafi, County Attorney, Central Islip, N.Y. (Frank
Krotschinsky of counsel), for appellant.
Collado, Collado & Fiore, PLLC, Brentwood, N.Y. (Andrew
J. Fiore of counsel), for respondent.
Robert C. Mitchell, Central Islip, N.Y. (John B. Belmonte of
counsel), Law Guardian for the
children.

In three related child protective proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Spinner, J.), dated August 11, 2005, which, at the close of the petitioner's case at the fact-finding hearing, dismissed the petition for failure to make out a prima facie case. [*2]

ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the petition is reinstated, and the matter is remitted to the Family Court, Suffolk County, for a new fact-finding hearing and determination.

The Family Court erred in finding that the petitioner failed to present a prima facie case that the child, Brenda C., had been sexually abused because her statements were uncorroborated. Although Family Court Act § 1046(a)(vi) provides that a child's out-of-court statements are insufficient to support a finding of abuse unless corroborated, here the subject child testified under oath at the fact-finding hearing. Since the child's sworn testimony was sufficient to establish a prima facie case that she had been sexually abused, the court should not have dismissed the petition at the close of the petitioner's case.
CRANE, J.P., RITTER, KRAUSMAN and SKELOS, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court