Matter of Emily M. (Anonymous)
Attorneys and Parties
Brief Summary
Child welfare/family law — civil contempt sanctions for failure to comply with a foster placement order under Social Services Law § 358-a [authorizes approval of instruments transferring care and custody of a child to a social services official].
Family Court held the Administration for Children's Services (ACS) in civil contempt for not placing the child in a traditional foster home as ordered, found actual injury to the child, and imposed a $250-per-day fine totaling $48,750.
The per-day $250 fine totaling $48,750 was reversed, and the matter was remitted for a new determination of a compensatory fine.
Because actual injury was shown, Judiciary Law § 773 [sets civil contempt fines: indemnify actual damages when provable; otherwise fine limited to $250 plus costs] requires a compensatory award reasonably tied to the injury, not use of the statutory $250 cap for unprovable damages or a punitive sanction; the record suggested the Family Court’s fine was punitive.
Background
In November 2023, the petitioner (ACS) commenced a Social Services Law § 358-a proceeding to approve an instrument transferring care and custody of the child to ACS. By order dated January 19, 2024, the Family Court directed ACS to place the child in a traditional foster home by January 26, 2024. ACS did not do so. The attorney for the child (AFC) moved to hold ACS in civil contempt for noncompliance.
Lower Court Decision
After a hearing, the Family Court granted the AFC’s motion, found that the child suffered actual injury from ACS’s noncompliance, and imposed a fine of $250 per day of noncompliance, totaling $48,750.
Appellate Division Reversal
On its own motion, the Appellate Division deemed the notice of appeal an application for leave to appeal and granted leave under Family Ct Act § 1112(a) [authorizes leave to appeal to the Appellate Division from certain Family Court orders]. The court held that although actual injury was adequately shown and hearsay objections were unpreserved (and thus the hearsay could be considered), the Family Court erred by imposing a $250-per-day fine. Where actual, reasonably ascertainable losses exist, Judiciary Law § 773 requires a compensatory fine reasonably related to the injury, not reliance on the $250 statutory cap for unprovable damages. The panel further noted the fine appeared punitive, given the court’s references to ACS’s “inconsistency and carelessness.” The matter was remitted for a new determination of a properly measured compensatory fine.
Legal Significance
Clarifies that in Family Court civil contempt, when actual injury is established, fines must indemnify the aggrieved party in an amount reasonably tied to the injury, rather than defaulting to the $250 statutory cap intended only for unprovable damages under Judiciary Law § 773. Also confirms that hearsay admitted without objection in a civil hearing may be considered for its probative value.
If a contemnor’s noncompliance causes actual, ascertainable injury, the court must set a compensatory fine reasonably related to that injury and avoid punitive or $250-cap-based per-day sanctions; improper punitive use of contempt sanctions will be reversed and remitted for recalculation.