Davidson v. Dennison

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Davidson v. Dennison

23 A.D.3d 950, 805 N.Y.S.2d 297

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

DecidedNovember 23, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 23 A.D.3d 950 (Davidson v. Dennison) 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

Davidson v. Dennison, 23 A.D.3d 950, 805 N.Y.S.2d 297 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Clemente, J.), entered December 15, 2004 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of the Board of Parole denying petitioner’s request for parole release.

Since the determination giving rise to this CPLR article 78 proceeding, petitioner has reappeared before the Board of Parole and again was denied parole release. Accordingly, the instant appeal is now moot and must be dismissed (see Matter of Lenihan v Travis, 17 AD3d 740 [2005]). Furthermore, we are unpersuaded by petitioner’s contention that this matter presents an exception to the mootness doctrine (see Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714-715 [1980]).

Spain, J.P., Carpinello, Mugglin, Rose and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Clemente, J.), entered December 15, 2004 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of the Board of Parole denying petitioner’s request for parole release.

Since the determination giving rise to this CPLR article 78 proceeding, petitioner has reappeared before the Board of Parole and again was denied parole release. Accordingly, the instant appeal is now moot and must be dismissed (see Matter of Lenihan v Travis, 17 AD3d 740 [2005]). Furthermore, we are unpersuaded by petitioner’s contention that this matter presents an exception to the mootness doctrine (see Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714-715 [1980]).

Spain, J.P., Carpinello, Mugglin, Rose and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 A.D.3d 950, 805 N.Y.S.2d 297, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davidson-v-dennison-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack