A07680 Summary:

BILL NOA07680
 
SAME ASSAME AS S07446
 
SPONSORMcMahon
 
COSPNSRButtenschon, Darling
 
MLTSPNSR
 
Amd 1056, Fam Ct Act
 
Relates to orders of protection in child abuse and neglect proceedings in family court.
Go to top    

A07680 Actions:

BILL NOA07680
 
06/05/2023referred to children and families
01/03/2024referred to children and families
03/19/2024reported referred to codes
05/07/2024reported
05/09/2024advanced to third reading cal.462
05/14/2024passed assembly
05/14/2024delivered to senate
05/14/2024REFERRED TO CHILDREN AND FAMILIES
Go to top

A07680 Committee Votes:

CHILDREN AND FAMILIES Chair:Hevesi DATE:03/19/2024AYE/NAY:16/0 Action: Favorable refer to committee Codes
HevesiAyeByrnesAye
DavilaAyeFloodAye
VanelAyeMaherAye
Jean-PierreExcusedMcGowanAye
DarlingAyePirozzoloAye
AndersonAye
ClarkAye
LunsfordAye
MeeksAye
Gonzalez-RojasAye
MitaynesAye
Chandler-WatermAye

CODES Chair:Dinowitz DATE:05/07/2024AYE/NAY:21/0 Action: Favorable
DinowitzAyeMorinelloAye
PretlowAyeReillyAye
CookAyeMikulinAye
LavineAyeTannousisAye
WeprinAyeCurranAye
HevesiAyeAngelinoAye
SeawrightAyeFloodAye
RosenthalAye
WalkerAye
VanelAye
CruzAye
CarrollExcused
SimonAye
EpsteinAye
BoresAye

Go to top

A07680 Floor Votes:

DATE:05/14/2024Assembly Vote  YEA/NAY: 147/0
Yes
Alvarez
Yes
Byrnes
Yes
Fall
Yes
Kelles
Yes
Otis
Yes
Simpson
Yes
Anderson
Yes
Carroll
Yes ‡
Fitzpatrick
Yes
Kim
Yes
Palmesano
Yes
Slater
Yes
Angelino
Yes
Chandler-Waterm
Yes
Flood
Yes
Lavine
Yes
Paulin
Yes
Smith
Yes
Ardila
Yes
Chang
Yes
Forrest
Yes
Lee
Yes
Peoples-Stokes
Yes
Smullen
Yes
Aubry
Yes
Clark
Yes
Friend
Yes
Lemondes
Yes
Pheffer Amato
Yes
Solages
Yes
Barclay
Yes
Colton
Yes
Gallagher
Yes
Levenberg
Yes
Pirozzolo
Yes
Steck
Yes
Barrett
Yes
Conrad
Yes
Gallahan
Yes
Lucas
Yes
Pretlow
Yes
Stern
Yes
Beephan
Yes
Cook
Yes
Gandolfo
Yes
Lunsford
Yes
Ra
Yes
Stirpe
Yes
Bendett
Yes
Cruz
Yes
Gibbs
Yes
Lupardo
Yes
Raga
Yes
Tague
Yes
Benedetto
Yes
Cunningham
Yes
Giglio JA
Yes
Magnarelli
Yes
Rajkumar
Yes
Tannousis
Yes
Berger
Yes
Curran
Yes
Giglio JM
Yes
Maher
Yes
Ramos
Yes
Tapia
Yes ‡
Bichotte Hermel
Yes
Dais
Yes
Glick
Yes
Mamdani
Yes
Reilly
Yes
Taylor
Yes
Blankenbush
Yes
Darling
Yes
Gonzalez-Rojas
Yes
Manktelow
Yes
Reyes
Yes
Thiele
Yes
Blumencranz
Yes
Davila
Yes
Goodell
Yes
McDonald
Yes
Rivera
Yes
Vanel
Yes
Bores
Yes
De Los Santos
Yes
Gray
Yes ‡
McDonough
Yes
Rosenthal
Yes
Walker
Yes
Brabenec
Yes
DeStefano
Yes
Gunther
Yes
McGowan
Yes
Rozic
Yes
Wallace
Yes
Braunstein
ER
Dickens
Yes
Hawley
Yes ‡
McMahon
Yes
Santabarbara
Yes
Walsh
Yes
Bronson
Yes
Dilan
Yes
Hevesi
Yes
Meeks
Yes
Sayegh
Yes
Weinstein
Yes
Brook-Krasny
Yes
Dinowitz
Yes
Hunter
Yes
Mikulin
ER
Seawright
Yes
Weprin
Yes
Brown EA
Yes
DiPietro
Yes
Hyndman
Yes
Miller
Yes
Septimo
Yes
Williams
Yes
Brown K
Yes
Durso
Yes
Jackson
Yes
Mitaynes
Yes
Shimsky
Yes
Woerner
Yes
Burdick
Yes
Eachus
Yes
Jacobson
Yes
Morinello
Yes
Shrestha
Yes
Zaccaro
Yes
Burgos
Yes
Eichenstein
Yes
Jean-Pierre
Yes
Norris
Yes ‡
Sillitti
Yes
Zebrowski
Yes
Burke
Yes
Epstein
Yes
Jensen
Yes
Novakhov
Yes
Simon
Yes
Zinerman
Yes
Buttenschon
Yes
Fahy
Yes
Jones
ER
O'Donnell
Yes
Simone
Yes
Mr. Speaker

‡ Indicates voting via videoconference
Go to top

A07680 Memo:

NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF LEGISLATION
submitted in accordance with Assembly Rule III, Sec 1(f)
 
BILL NUMBER: A7680
 
SPONSOR: McMahon
  TITLE OF BILL: An act to amend the family court act, in relation to orders of protection in child abuse and neglect proceedings in family court This measure would amend the opening paragraph of section 1056 of the Family Court Act (FCA) and would add a new subdivision (4-a) to that section to cure a serious problem confronting child victims of physical and sexual violence in child protective cases: i.e. by extending the extremely short duration of orders of protection against an individual found to have abused or neglected a subject child who is not the child's parent. The current maximum of two years in abuse and neglect cases is far shorter than applicable periods for orders in family offense, custo- dy, visitation, child support and paternity proceedings. Section 1056(1) of the FCA authorizes an order of protection against respondent parents, persons legally responsible for a child's care and such persons' spouses in child neglect and abuse proceedings to last only as long as a child protective dispositional orders of supervision. See Matter of Pedro A. v. Gloria A., A.D.3d, 2019 (3rd Dept., Jan. 3, 2019); Matter of Makayla I v. Harold J., 162 A.D.3d 1139 (3rd Dept., 2018); Matter of Nevaeh T, 151 A.D.3d 1766 (4th Dept., 2017); Matter of Alexis A. (Richard V.), 143 A.D.3d 700 (2nd Dept., 2016); Matter of Kole HH, 84 A.D.3d 1518 (3rd Dept., 2011); Matter of Patricia B., 61 A.D.3d 861 (2d Dept., 2009), lye. app. denied, 13 N.Y.3d 713 (2009); Matter of Andrew Y., 44 A.D.3d 1063 (2d Dept., 2007); Matter of Candace S., 38 A.D.3d 786 (2d Dept., 2007), lye. app. denied, 9 N.Y.3d 805 (2007); Matter of Amanda WW., 43 A.D.3d 1256 (3d Dept., 2007); Matter of Collin H., 28 A.D.3d 806 (3d Dept., 2006). Dispositions in child protective cases include, inter alia, release of a child under supervision for one year, subject to a maximum one-year extension. Thus, orders of protection against a non-parent, or person legally responsible for the child, may only last for one year, subject to a one-year e xtension even in the most extreme cases of severe physical or sexual abuse. This leaves children vulnerable to continued harm in their own homes, when the Family Court's supervision ends. The FCA and Domestic Relations Law authorize far longer orders with respect to identical allegations in other categories of cases, e.g., family offense and custody proceedings. This measure would remedy the problem. As the law does with orders of protection in family offense cases, the new subdivision (4-a) provides that orders of protection issued in child protective proceedings against individuals who are not the parents of the child, but who were members of the household at the time of the disposition, may last up to two years or, upon findings of special circumstances, up to five years, subject to an annual review. Similar to the definition of "aggravating circumstances" in FCA § 827(a)(vii), "special circumstances" in FCA § 1056(1) would include: injury or seri- ous physical injury caused by the respondent to the protected person or persons or any minor child, the use of a dangerous instrument by the respondent against the protected persons or persons or any minor child, a history of violations of orders of protection by the respondent, prior convictions for crimes against the protected person or persons or a minor child by the respondent, or the exposure by the respondent of the protected person or persons or a minor child or any family or household member to physical injury, or acts constituting a sex offense as defined in subdivision (e) of section 1012 of the   Family Court Act, and like incidents or behaviors and occurrences which to the court constitute an immediate and ongoing danger to the protected person or persons or a minor child or any family or household member. This measure does not create a new class of orders of protection nor does it impose any penalty or punitive action upon the respondent who has been found to have committed the abuse or neglect after admission or trial. Nor does it prevent a parent from contact with their biological children. Provisions for time-limited orders subject to regular review would, therefore, be consistent with the requirement for time-limited orders with authorizations for periodic judicial review as established by the Court of Appeals in Matter of Sheena D., 8 N.Y.3d 136 (2007). Section 1056's current time limits stand in sharp contrast to the dura- tion limits of family offense orders of protection, which were extended by the Legislature in 2003 to up to two years or, if aggravating circum- stances or a violation of an order of protection are found, up to five years after the conclusion of the case. See FCA § 842. Orders of protection in custody, visitation and other civil proceedings in Supreme and Family Court may also last for specified periods until the youngest child reaches age 18. Indeed, the Family Court in Child Protective Services ex rel Ashley B. v. William7 Misc.3d 1017(A), (Fam. Ct., Suff. Co., 2005)(Unrep.), in issuing a longer order in admitted contravention of the statutory language, stated: The facts of this case involve a grandfather who sexually abused his granddaughter. It is more likely than not that if not prevented from being a part of this child's life he may appear at some social or family function at a future date and the child and her siblings would not be protected by a Family Court order of protection. FCA § 115 provides that the Family Court has exclusive original juris- diction over abuse and neglect proceedings as set forth in Article 10. FCA § 1011 states that the Article is designed to help and protect chil- dren from injury or mistreatment and to safeguard their physical, mental and emotional well-being. Since the Court is statutorily empowered to issue an order of protection until a child's 18th birthday in a custody/visitation matter, it defies logic that the Court would not have a similar power under a child abuse/neglect proceeding. The law as it currently stands is ultimately contrary to the purpose clause and spirit of the Family Court Act, which, in section 1011, states that, consistent with due process, it is "designed to establish procedures to help protect children from injury or mistreatment and to help safeguard their physical, mental, and emotional well-being." As the court held, in Child Protective Services ex rel Ashley B., supra, it defies logic that in a custody case the court may issue an order of protection that is valid until after a child turns 18 but is unable to offer more than two years of protection in a case of serious physical or sexual abuse. Similar to Child Protective Services ex rel Ashley B., supra, the case of Matter of Makayla I. v. Harold .I, supra, supports enactment of this measure. Notwithstanding the Appellate Division's agreement in Makayla I. with Family Court's conclusion that the best interests of two chil- dren would be served by prohibiting contact by the grandfather with his grandchild and step-grandchild in light of the finding of sexual abuse, the court was constrained to limit the duration of the order of protection regarding the grandchild to the one-year duration of the supervision order. Underscoring the potentially dangerous nature of the current statute, the court remanded the case regarding the order of protection with respect to the step-grandchild for Family Court to determine whether the grandfather was related by blood or marriage to a "member of the child's household." Clearly both children required protection from future sexual abuse and the legal provisions impeded the court's ability to fulfill its mission of ensuring safety for both chil- dren. The majority of child abuse and serious neglect cases are never prose- cuted in criminal court. Nor can these children rely on a parent to file a family offense petition on their behalf, and even if one was filed, they would have to testify in open court against their abuser, revictim- izing them. The only protections these children have are left up to the discretion of a Family Court Judge in a child welfare case. This law would expand the length of time for that protection to allow the child more time to heal and recover from the neglect and /or abuse. Under current law, a household member living in the home of the child who is the subject of a child abuse case, who has subjected the child to sexual abuse or other severe forms of child abuse, may only be ordered out of the home for the period of the disposition, typically one year, a period that may be extended for only one additional year. Incorporation into FCA § 1056 of the potential protection of a period of two years or, where special circumstances have been found, five years, with due proc- ess provisions for annual judicial review, is essential to prevent further injury to children and critically important to effectuate the purpose clause of the child protective article of the FCA. This measure, which would have no fiscal impact, would take effect 90 days after becoming law.   LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 2021-22: OCA-52   LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 2019-20: OCA-18(R1)
Go to top

A07680 Text:



 
                STATE OF NEW YORK
        ________________________________________________________________________
 
                                          7680
 
                               2023-2024 Regular Sessions
 
                   IN ASSEMBLY
 
                                      June 5, 2023
                                       ___________
 
        Introduced  by  M.  of  A. McMAHON -- (at request of the Office of Court
          Administration) -- read once and referred to the Committee on Children
          and Families
 
        AN ACT to  amend  the  family  court  act,  in  relation  to  orders  of
          protection in child abuse and neglect proceedings in family court

          The  People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assem-
        bly, do enact as follows:
 
     1    Section 1. The opening paragraph of subdivision 1 of section  1056  of
     2  the  family court act, as amended by chapter 526 of the laws of 2013, is
     3  amended to read as follows:
     4    The court may [make] issue an order of protection in assistance or  as
     5  a  condition  of  any  other  order  made under this part. Such order of
     6  protection shall remain in effect concurrently  with,  shall  expire  no
     7  later  than  the  expiration  date  of, and may be extended concurrently
     8  with, such other order made under  this  part,  except  as  provided  in
     9  subdivision  four  and  subdivision four-a of this section. The order of
    10  protection may  set  forth  reasonable  conditions  of  behavior  to  be
    11  observed for a specified time by a person who is before the court and is
    12  a  parent  or  a  person legally responsible for the child's care or the
    13  spouse of the parent or other person legally responsible for the child's
    14  care, or both. Such an order may require any such person:
    15    § 2. Section 1056 of the family court act is amended by adding  a  new
    16  subdivision 4-a to read as follows:
    17    4-a.  The  court may issue an order of protection against a person who
    18  was a member of the child's household or a person legally responsible as
    19  defined in section one thousand twelve of this article and who is not  a
    20  parent  of  the  child, independently of any other order made under this
    21  part which may contain any provision authorized under subdivision one of
    22  this section. Such order of protection issued  under  this  section  may
    23  remain  in effect for a period of up to two years or, if the court finds
    24  special circumstances, a period of up to five  years.  For  purposes  of
 
         EXPLANATION--Matter in italics (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                              [ ] is old law to be omitted.
                                                                   LBD08978-01-3

        A. 7680                             2
 
     1  this  section,  "special  circumstances"  shall  mean physical injury or
     2  serious physical injury caused by the respondent to the protected person
     3  or persons or any minor child, the use of a dangerous instrument by  the
     4  respondent against the protected person or persons or any minor child, a
     5  history  of  violations of orders of protection by the respondent, prior
     6  convictions for crimes against the protected  person  or  persons  or  a
     7  minor  child  by the respondent or the exposure by the respondent of the
     8  protected person or persons or a minor child or any family or  household
     9  member  to physical injury or acts constituting a sex offense as defined
    10  in subdivision (e) of section one thousand twelve of  this  article  and
    11  like  incidents, behaviors and occurrences which to the court constitute
    12  an immediate and ongoing danger to the protected person or persons or  a
    13  minor  child or any family or household member. Such order of protection
    14  may be extended independently or concurrently  with,  any  order  issued
    15  under this article or article ten-A of this chapter. Such order shall be
    16  subject  to  annual  review,  modification or vacatur by the court, upon
    17  motion by any party as provided herein. The total period of  such  order
    18  shall be no more than two years, or if there was a special circumstances
    19  finding, five years from the date of the initial order.
    20    §  3.  This  act shall take effect on the ninetieth day after it shall
    21  have become a law.
Go to top

A07680 LFIN:

 NO LFIN
Go to top

A07680 Chamber Video/Transcript:

5-14-24Video (@ 01:43:13)
Go to top