DCPP VS. B.D.Â IN THE MATTER OF M.D. AND A.D.(FN-07-0544-14, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)(RECORD IMPOUNDED), A-1223-15T4

On April 24, 2014 Newark police responded after a bystander found 12‑year‑old M.D. crying, bleeding and limping; M.D. reported her father, B.D., struck her after accusing her of stealing $25.
Officer observed swelling, cuts and bruises; EMS transported M.D. to the hospital; police arrested B.D. for aggravated assault and child endangerment after M.D.’s statement.
Division caseworker observed and photographed abrasions on M.D.; medical staff concluded injuries were consistent with assault and recommended follow‑up care.
B.D. admitted a scuffle over house keys while M.D. was on the ground but denied punching or intending to injure her; he left M.D. and took the younger sister, A.D., to school.
A.D. denied seeing B.D. hit M.D. and blamed M.D. for the incident; M.D.’s accounts varied (initially that B.D. struck her, later that she fell while fleeing).
Family Part found, by a preponderance of the evidence, that B.D. abused or neglected M.D. under N.J.S.A. 9:6‑8.21(c); this appeal followed and the Appellate Division affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether evidence was sufficient to find abuse/neglect under Title 9 (N.J.S.A. 9:6‑8.21(c))	Division: officer and caseworker testimony, medical records, and photos corroborate M.D.’s account and show injuries caused by B.D.’s deliberate conduct	B.D.: evidence insufficient; inconsistencies in M.D.’s statements and no intent to harm — at most negligence	Court affirmed: substantial, credible evidence supports that B.D.’s deliberate actions during the scuffle created a substantial probability of harm and meet Title 9’s gross‑negligence/reckless standard
Whether the court improperly relied on M.D.’s out‑of‑court statements	Division: child’s statements are admissible and were corroborated by independent observations and medical evidence	B.D.: court misapplied the law by relying on uncorroborated hearsay to find abuse/neglect	Court held statements admissible and sufficiently corroborated by officer and caseworker observations, photographs, and medical records; not sole basis but supportive evidence

N.J. Div. of Youth & Family Servs. v. M.C. III, 201 N.J. 328 (court defers to family court credibility findings; deliberate acts that disregard probable injury can constitute abuse)
N.J. Div. of Youth & Family Servs. v. T.B., 207 N.J. 294 (Title 9 requires more than ordinary negligence; standard is grossly negligent or reckless conduct)
G.S. v. Dep’t of Human Servs., 157 N.J. 161 (explains gross/wanton negligence and imputed knowledge where reasonable person would perceive dangerous risk)
Dep’t of Children & Families v. P.W.R., 205 N.J. 17 (corroboration requirement for child’s out‑of‑court statements; corroborative evidence need not be direct)
McLaughlin v. Rova Farms, Inc., 56 N.J. 288 (discussion of gross negligence versus ordinary negligence)