IN THE MATTER OF LEE "TT", RESPONDENT, v. MICHAEL DOWLING, AS COMMISSIONER OF
THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, ET AL., APPELLANTS.
IN THE MATTER OF JOEL P. ET AL., RESPONDENTS-APPELLANTS, v. MARY JO BANE, AS
COMMISSIONER OF THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, ET AL.,
APPELLANTS-RESPONDENTS, BARBARA J. SABOL, &C., ET AL., RESPONDENTS.
87 N.Y.2d 699, 664 N.E.2d 1243, 642 N.Y.S.2d 181 (1996).
April 4, 1996
3 No. 54(1996 NY Int. 73)
1 No. 55(1996 NY Int. 73)
Decided April 4, 1996
_________________________________________________________________
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication
in the New York Reports.
No. 54:
Lew A. Millenbach, for Appellants.
Kevin L. O'Brien, for Respondent.
No. 55:
Lew A. Millenbach, for Appellants-respondents.
Richard A. Greenberg, for Respondents-appellants.
Benjamin J. Rosin, for Respondents.
SIMONS, J.:
These are two unrelated article 78 proceedings in which petitioners
sought to have their names expunged from the New York State Central
Register of Child Abuse and Maltreatment. Respondents, officials of
the State and local Social Services Departments, appeal orders of the
Appellate Division which, in each proceeding, declared that the
statutory standard of proof sufficient to substantiate reports of
abuse entered in the Central Register violates the due process clause
of the federal constitution (US Constitutional Amdt XIV) and remitted
the matters for new determinations. In Matter of Joel P., et al.,
petitioners cross appeal, contending that they are entitled to a new
hearing.
The orders should be affirmed and the matters remitted to the
Department of Social Services for new determinations based upon the
existing record.
SNIPPETS:
THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, ET AL., APPELLANTS.
IN THE MATTER OF JOEL P. ET AL., RESPONDENTS-APPELLANTS, v. MARY JO BANE, AS
COMMISSIONER OF THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, ET AL.,
Lew A. Millenbach, for Appellants-respondents.
Benjamin J. Rosin, for Respondents.
These are two unrelated article 78 proceedings in which petitioners sought to have their
Respondents, officials of the State and local Social Services Departments, appeal orders of
In Matter of Joel P., et al., petitioners cross appeal, contending that they are entitled to
The Register serves three broad purposes: to aid social workers in their duties of
In an effort to reconcile the conflicting interests of the State in maintaining the Register
nistrative decision denying expunction.
A report of abuse must be substantiated by a fair preponderance of the evidence before
A report is indicated if there is "some credible evidence" that the subject committed the act
Petitioner then instituted an article 78 proceeding asserting that the Commissioner's
The stigma which results from the publication of such defamatory material is not
Foster parents are licensed by the State or an authorized foster care agency
|
