Hicks v. Gibson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hicks v. Gibson

303 A.D.2d 1021, 758 N.Y.S.2d 441, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2924

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

DecidedMarch 21, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 303 A.D.2d 1021 (Hicks v. Gibson) 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

Hicks v. Gibson, 303 A.D.2d 1021, 758 N.Y.S.2d 441, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2924 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from an order of Supreme Court, Erie County (Whelan, J.), entered September 21, 2001, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint. We agree with defendant that the complaint fails to state a cause of action (see CPLR 3211 [7]). Contrary to plaintiffs’ contention, the Erie County Holding Center (ECHC) has no duty to file its policies with the Department of State. Article IV, § 8 of the NY Constitution provides that “[n]o rule or regulation made by any state department, board, bureau, officer, authority or commission * * * shall be [1022]*1022effective until it is filed in the office of the Department of State.” That section applies to state agencies or departments and thus does not apply to ECHO (see Matter of Long Is. Jewish-Hillside Med. Ctr. v McBarnette, 216 AD2d 731, 732 [1995]). We reject plaintiffs’ further contention that 9 NYCRR 7031.1 (a) grants them a right to visit prisoners. Section 7031.1 (a) provides that “[e]ach prisoner confined in a local correctional facility is entitled to legal services.” The right afforded by that section is that of prisoners, not of providers of legal services. Present— Hurlbutt, J.P., Kehoe, Gorski, Lawton and Hayes, JJ.

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

—Appeal from an order of Supreme Court, Erie County (Whelan, J.), entered September 21, 2001, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint. We agree with defendant that the complaint fails to state a cause of action (see CPLR 3211 [7]). Contrary to plaintiffs’ contention, the Erie County Holding Center (ECHC) has no duty to file its policies with the Department of State. Article IV, § 8 of the NY Constitution provides that “[n]o rule or regulation made by any state department, board, bureau, officer, authority or commission * * * shall be [1022]*1022effective until it is filed in the office of the Department of State.” That section applies to state agencies or departments and thus does not apply to ECHO (see Matter of Long Is. Jewish-Hillside Med. Ctr. v McBarnette, 216 AD2d 731, 732 [1995]). We reject plaintiffs’ further contention that 9 NYCRR 7031.1 (a) grants them a right to visit prisoners. Section 7031.1 (a) provides that “[e]ach prisoner confined in a local correctional facility is entitled to legal services.” The right afforded by that section is that of prisoners, not of providers of legal services. Present— Hurlbutt, J.P., Kehoe, Gorski, Lawton and Hayes, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

303 A.D.2d 1021, 758 N.Y.S.2d 441, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2924, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hicks-v-gibson-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack