Davidson v. Scully

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Davidson v. Scully

106 A.D.2d 576, 483 N.Y.S.2d 81, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21877

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

DecidedDecember 24, 1984

StatusPublished

This text of 106 A.D.2d 576 (Davidson v. Scully) 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. Scully, 106 A.D.2d 576, 483 N.Y.S.2d 81, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21877 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to prohibit respondent warden from feeding personnel of the Unified Court System during terms of the Supreme Court of the State of New York held at Green Haven Correctional Facility, petitioner inmate appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Rosenblatt, J.), dated September 2, 1983, which dismissed the proceeding.

Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Petitioner lacks standing to bring the instant proceeding (see Valley Forge Coll, v Americans United, 454 US 464, 483-484; Flast v Cohen, 392 US 83, 106). Even were we to consider the petition on the merits, we would still affirm. There exist substantial legitimate State interests (e.g., reducing security risks and promoting economy of personnel) reasonably served by providing food to the court staff, including court-appointed counsel, and petitioner himself concedes in his brief that “perhaps the practise [sic] of feeding the personnage [sic] of the court at its terms at prison facilities assists the work of the Supreme Court, by enabling it to review more expediously [sic] the various complaints of prisoners”. O’Connor, J. P., Brown, Lawrence and Eiber, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to prohibit respondent warden from feeding personnel of the Unified Court System during terms of the Supreme Court of the State of New York held at Green Haven Correctional Facility, petitioner inmate appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Rosenblatt, J.), dated September 2, 1983, which dismissed the proceeding.

Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Petitioner lacks standing to bring the instant proceeding (see Valley Forge Coll, v Americans United, 454 US 464, 483-484; Flast v Cohen, 392 US 83, 106). Even were we to consider the petition on the merits, we would still affirm. There exist substantial legitimate State interests (e.g., reducing security risks and promoting economy of personnel) reasonably served by providing food to the court staff, including court-appointed counsel, and petitioner himself concedes in his brief that “perhaps the practise [sic] of feeding the personnage [sic] of the court at its terms at prison facilities assists the work of the Supreme Court, by enabling it to review more expediously [sic] the various complaints of prisoners”. O’Connor, J. P., Brown, Lawrence and Eiber, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

106 A.D.2d 576, 483 N.Y.S.2d 81, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21877, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davidson-v-scully-nyappdiv-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack