Joyce v. Mann

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Joyce v. Mann

190 A.D.2d 922, 593 N.Y.S.2d 579, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1104

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

DecidedFebruary 11, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 190 A.D.2d 922 (Joyce v. Mann) 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

Joyce v. Mann, 190 A.D.2d 922, 593 N.Y.S.2d 579, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1104 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Torraca, J.), entered June 15, 1992 in Ulster County, which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, dismissed the petition, inter alia, as time barred and for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

While incarcerated at Shawangunk Correctional Facility in Ulster County, petitioner filed numerous grievances relating to medical services, alleged confiscation and destruction of personal property and harassment. Petitioner commenced this proceeding requesting investigation and appropriate discipline of correctional services staff who have harassed him, an order enjoining further harassment and directing the return of all personal property, as well as money damages. Supreme Court dismissed the petition. We affirm.

We agree with Supreme Court that petitioner failed to exhaust his administrative remedies in all but 11 of his grievances, requiring dismissal of the petition as it pertains to these grievances (see, Matter of Roberts v Coughlin, 165 AD2d 964; Matter of Harris v Coughlin, 157 AD2d 997). As to the grievances for which petitioner did exhaust his administrative remedies, the record reveals that this proceeding was commence^ more than four months after petitioner was given notice of the final determinations and must therefore be dismissed as time barred (see, Matter of Bogle v Mann, 175 AD2d 409). Supreme Court also properly found that it had no jurisdiction to consider petitioner’s claims for money damages (see, Matter of Ronson v Commissioner of Correction, State of N Y., 112 AD2d 488). Finally, given that petitioner is no Monger incarcerated at Shawangunk Correctional Facility, his request for injunctive relief against the staff in that facility is (moot.

Weiss, P. J., Levine, Mercure, Mahoney and Harvey, 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 (Torraca, J.), entered June 15, 1992 in Ulster County, which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, dismissed the petition, inter alia, as time barred and for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

While incarcerated at Shawangunk Correctional Facility in Ulster County, petitioner filed numerous grievances relating to medical services, alleged confiscation and destruction of personal property and harassment. Petitioner commenced this proceeding requesting investigation and appropriate discipline of correctional services staff who have harassed him, an order enjoining further harassment and directing the return of all personal property, as well as money damages. Supreme Court dismissed the petition. We affirm.

We agree with Supreme Court that petitioner failed to exhaust his administrative remedies in all but 11 of his grievances, requiring dismissal of the petition as it pertains to these grievances (see, Matter of Roberts v Coughlin, 165 AD2d 964; Matter of Harris v Coughlin, 157 AD2d 997). As to the grievances for which petitioner did exhaust his administrative remedies, the record reveals that this proceeding was commence^ more than four months after petitioner was given notice of the final determinations and must therefore be dismissed as time barred (see, Matter of Bogle v Mann, 175 AD2d 409). Supreme Court also properly found that it had no jurisdiction to consider petitioner’s claims for money damages (see, Matter of Ronson v Commissioner of Correction, State of N Y., 112 AD2d 488). Finally, given that petitioner is no Monger incarcerated at Shawangunk Correctional Facility, his request for injunctive relief against the staff in that facility is (moot.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

190 A.D.2d 922, 593 N.Y.S.2d 579, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1104, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/joyce-v-mann-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack