Afrika v. Jones

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Afrika v. Jones

148 A.D.2d 811, 538 N.Y.S.2d 1015, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2373

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 9, 1989

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 148 A.D.2d 811 (Afrika v. Jones) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Afrika v. Jones, 148 A.D.2d 811, 538 N.Y.S.2d 1015, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2373 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Washington County) to review a determination of respondents which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Since the inception of this proceeding, respondents have reversed the determination finding petitioner guilty of violating certain disciplinary rules and have expunged all references thereto from petitioner’s institutional record. Consequently, respondents seek to dismiss the proceeding as moot. Petitioner, however, has objected to the motion and contends that an exception to the mootness doctrine exists since the questions raised herein evade judicial review. We disagree. The issue before us has been rendered moot and is not such as to evade judicial review (see, Matter of David C., 69 NY2d 796, 798).

Petition dismissed, as moot, without costs. Weiss, J. P., Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., Mercure and Harvey, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Washington County) to review a determination of respondents which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Since the inception of this proceeding, respondents have reversed the determination finding petitioner guilty of violating certain disciplinary rules and have expunged all references thereto from petitioner’s institutional record. Consequently, respondents seek to dismiss the proceeding as moot. Petitioner, however, has objected to the motion and contends that an exception to the mootness doctrine exists since the questions raised herein evade judicial review. We disagree. The issue before us has been rendered moot and is not such as to evade judicial review (see, Matter of David C., 69 NY2d 796, 798).

Petition dismissed, as moot, without costs. Weiss, J. P., Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., Mercure and Harvey, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

148 A.D.2d 811, 538 N.Y.S.2d 1015, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2373, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/afrika-v-jones-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack