Carty v. New York City Police Department

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Carty v. New York City Police Department

41 A.D.3d 150, 837 N.Y.S.2d 135

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

DecidedJune 7, 2007

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 41 A.D.3d 150 (Carty v. New York City Police Department) 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

Carty v. New York City Police Department, 41 A.D.3d 150, 837 N.Y.S.2d 135 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter B. Tolub, J.), entered June 16, 2006, which denied the motion to amend the petition to include Freedom of Information Law requests for documents not previously sought, and granted respondent’s cross motion to dismiss the proceeding as moot, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

This proceeding was rendered moot by respondent’s certification that it had conducted a diligent search for the records that could not be located (Matter of Rattley v New York City Police Dept., 96 NY2d 873 [2001]; Matter of Alicea v New York City Police Dept., 287 AD2d 286 [2001]). Amendment of the petition to seek additional documents not previously requested was properly denied for petitioner’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies, a burden not negated by respondent’s purported failure to respond to the amended request in a timely fashion (Matter of Taylor v New York City Police Dept. FOIL Unit, 25 AD3d 347 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 714 [2006]). Concur— Andrias, J.P., Gonzalez, Sweeny, McGuire and Malone, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter B. Tolub, J.), entered June 16, 2006, which denied the motion to amend the petition to include Freedom of Information Law requests for documents not previously sought, and granted respondent’s cross motion to dismiss the proceeding as moot, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

This proceeding was rendered moot by respondent’s certification that it had conducted a diligent search for the records that could not be located (Matter of Rattley v New York City Police Dept., 96 NY2d 873 [2001]; Matter of Alicea v New York City Police Dept., 287 AD2d 286 [2001]). Amendment of the petition to seek additional documents not previously requested was properly denied for petitioner’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies, a burden not negated by respondent’s purported failure to respond to the amended request in a timely fashion (Matter of Taylor v New York City Police Dept. FOIL Unit, 25 AD3d 347 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 714 [2006]). Concur— Andrias, J.P., Gonzalez, Sweeny, McGuire and Malone, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

41 A.D.3d 150, 837 N.Y.S.2d 135, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carty-v-new-york-city-police-department-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack