Britt v. Fischer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Britt v. Fischer

76 A.D.2d 735, 905 N.Y.S.2d 523

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

DecidedAugust 5, 2010

StatusPublished

This text of 76 A.D.2d 735 (Britt v. Fischer) 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

Britt v. Fischer, 76 A.D.2d 735, 905 N.Y.S.2d 523 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a determination finding him guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule. The Attorney General has advised this Court that the determination at issue has been administratively reversed, all references thereto have been expunged from petitioner’s institutional record and the $5 mandatory surcharge has been restored to petitioner’s inmate account. Although petitioner also requests restoration to the status he enjoyed prior to the disciplinary proceeding, he has received all the relief to which he is entitled and the matter must be dismissed as moot (see Matter of Bornstorff v Fischer, 67 AD3d 1138 [2009] ; Matter of Henriquez v Goord, 34 AD3d 962 [2006]).

Mercure, J.P., Peters, Kavanagh, Stein and McCarthy, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the petition is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

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 Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a determination finding him guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule. The Attorney General has advised this Court that the determination at issue has been administratively reversed, all references thereto have been expunged from petitioner’s institutional record and the $5 mandatory surcharge has been restored to petitioner’s inmate account. Although petitioner also requests restoration to the status he enjoyed prior to the disciplinary proceeding, he has received all the relief to which he is entitled and the matter must be dismissed as moot (see Matter of Bornstorff v Fischer, 67 AD3d 1138 [2009] ; Matter of Henriquez v Goord, 34 AD3d 962 [2006]).

Mercure, J.P., Peters, Kavanagh, Stein and McCarthy, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the petition is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

76 A.D.2d 735, 905 N.Y.S.2d 523, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/britt-v-fischer-nyappdiv-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack