BOSCO, MAUREEN v. F., QUINTON

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 16, 2012
DocketCA 11-01904
StatusPublished

This text of BOSCO, MAUREEN v. F., QUINTON (BOSCO, MAUREEN v. F., QUINTON) 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
BOSCO, MAUREEN v. F., QUINTON, (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1163 CA 11-01904 PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, SCONIERS, AND MARTOCHE, JJ.

IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF MAUREEN BOSCO, ACTING EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL NEW YORK PSYCHIATRIC CENTER, PETITIONER-RESPONDENT, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER FOR AN ORDER AUTHORIZING THE INVOLUNTARY TREATMENT OF QUINTON F., A PATIENT AT CENTRAL NEW YORK PSYCHIATRIC CENTER, RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

EMMETT J. CREAHAN, DIRECTOR, MENTAL HYGIENE LEGAL SERVICE, UTICA (CRAIG P. SCHLANGER OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (KATHLEEN M. TREASURE OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER-RESPONDENT.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Oneida County (Samuel D. Hester, J.), entered August 9, 2011. The order granted the application of petitioner seeking authorization to administer medication to respondent over his objection.

It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs.

Memorandum: Respondent appeals from an order granting the application of petitioner seeking authorization to administer medication to respondent over his objection. The order has since expired, rendering this appeal moot (see Matter of Bosco v Michael N., 93 AD3d 1207, 1207; Matter of Rene L., 27 AD3d 1136, 1136-1137), and this case does not fall within the exception to the mootness doctrine (see Matter of McGrath, 245 AD2d 1081, 1082; see generally Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714-715).

Entered: November 16, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court

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

Related

Hearst Corp. v. Clyne
409 N.E.2d 876 (New York Court of Appeals, 1980)
In re Lee
27 A.D.3d 1136 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Bosco v. Michael N.
93 A.D.3d 1207 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
In re McGrath
245 A.D.2d 1081 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
BOSCO, MAUREEN v. F., QUINTON, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bosco-maureen-v-f-quinton-nyappdiv-2012.