Lashway v. Kuhlmann

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lashway v. Kuhlmann

282 A.D.2d 850, 722 N.Y.S.2d 926, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3671

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

DecidedApril 12, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 282 A.D.2d 850 (Lashway v. Kuhlmann) 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

Lashway v. Kuhlmann, 282 A.D.2d 850, 722 N.Y.S.2d 926, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3671 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (LaBuda, J.), entered August 11, 2000 in Sullivan County, which denied petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services finding petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a determination which found him guilty of committing an unhygienic act on the ground that his disciplinary hearing was not timely commenced. Supreme Court denied the application and we affirm. Contrary to petitioner’s assertion, the delay in commencement of the hearing was authorized by a valid extension indicating that the hearing was to be completed within 13 days after his release from confinement for mental health observation (see, Matter of Lashway v Kuhlmann, 278 AD2d 605; Matter of Pabon v Kuhlmann, 269 AD2d 635). Petitioner’s hearing began on the sixth day and concluded on the eighth day following his return to the correctional facility from an ofF-site mental health facility, well within the time frame established by the extension.

Cardona, P. J., Peters, Spain, Mugglin and Rose, 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 (LaBuda, J.), entered August 11, 2000 in Sullivan County, which denied petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services finding petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a determination which found him guilty of committing an unhygienic act on the ground that his disciplinary hearing was not timely commenced. Supreme Court denied the application and we affirm. Contrary to petitioner’s assertion, the delay in commencement of the hearing was authorized by a valid extension indicating that the hearing was to be completed within 13 days after his release from confinement for mental health observation (see, Matter of Lashway v Kuhlmann, 278 AD2d 605; Matter of Pabon v Kuhlmann, 269 AD2d 635). Petitioner’s hearing began on the sixth day and concluded on the eighth day following his return to the correctional facility from an ofF-site mental health facility, well within the time frame established by the extension.

Cardona, P. J., Peters, Spain, Mugglin and Rose, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

282 A.D.2d 850, 722 N.Y.S.2d 926, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3671, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lashway-v-kuhlmann-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack