Davis v. Herbert

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Davis v. Herbert

209 A.D.2d 1046, 619 N.Y.S.2d 1024, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12154

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 16, 1994·No. Appeal No. 1·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The Parole Board gave fair consideration to the applicable statutory factors (see, Executive Law § 259-i), and its denial of petitioner’s request for parole was not arbitrary and capricious (see, Matter of Watkins v Caldwell, 54 AD2d 42, 45; see also, Matter of Russo [1047] v New York State Bd. of Parole, 50 NY2d 69, 77). Supreme Court properly denied petitioner’s postjudgment motion for disclosure of documents because those documents are exempt pursuant to 9 NYCRR 8000.5 (c) (2). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Flaherty, J.—Article 78.) Present—Balio, J. P., Lawton, Fallon, Wesley and Doerr, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The Parole Board gave fair consideration to the applicable statutory factors (see, Executive Law § 259-i), and its denial of petitioner’s request for parole was not arbitrary and capricious (see, Matter of Watkins v Caldwell, 54 AD2d 42, 45; see also, Matter of Russo [1047] v New York State Bd. of Parole, 50 NY2d 69, 77). Supreme Court properly denied petitioner’s postjudgment motion for disclosure of documents because those documents are exempt pursuant to 9 NYCRR 8000.5 (c) (2). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Flaherty, J.—Article 78.) Present—Balio, J. P., Lawton, Fallon, Wesley and Doerr, JJ.

Davis v. Herbert, 209 A.D.2d 1046, 619 N.Y.S.2d 1024, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12154 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

209 A.D.2d 1046 (Davis v. Herbert) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related