Fox v. Malone

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Fox v. Malone

196 A.D.2d 913, 602 N.Y.S.2d 36, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8679

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

DecidedSeptember 23, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 196 A.D.2d 913 (Fox v. Malone) 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

Fox v. Malone, 196 A.D.2d 913, 602 N.Y.S.2d 36, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8679 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Canfield, J.), entered April 27, 1992 in Ulster County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent denying petitioner’s request to expunge certain information contained in his institutional files.

Petitioner contends that information contained in institutional records prepared prior to his transfer from Sullivan Correctional Facility to Attica Correctional Facility indicating that he is a security problem are inaccurate, and that he should have been afforded a hearing at which to contest the [914]*914information. The only records shown to contain the information contested are program security and assessment summary forms. Petitioner has no right to contest the information in such forms (see, Matter of Eastman v Malone, 186 AD2d 840; Matter of Rowland D. v Scully, 152 AD2d 570, affd 76 NY2d 725).

Weiss, P. J., Mikoll, Mercure and Mahoney, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, 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 (Canfield, J.), entered April 27, 1992 in Ulster County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent denying petitioner’s request to expunge certain information contained in his institutional files.

Petitioner contends that information contained in institutional records prepared prior to his transfer from Sullivan Correctional Facility to Attica Correctional Facility indicating that he is a security problem are inaccurate, and that he should have been afforded a hearing at which to contest the [914]*914information. The only records shown to contain the information contested are program security and assessment summary forms. Petitioner has no right to contest the information in such forms (see, Matter of Eastman v Malone, 186 AD2d 840; Matter of Rowland D. v Scully, 152 AD2d 570, affd 76 NY2d 725).

Weiss, P. J., Mikoll, Mercure and Mahoney, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

196 A.D.2d 913, 602 N.Y.S.2d 36, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8679, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fox-v-malone-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack