Lawrence v. Selsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lawrence v. Selsky

261 A.D.2d 404, 690 N.Y.S.2d 68

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

DecidedMay 3, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 261 A.D.2d 404 (Lawrence v. Selsky) 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

Lawrence v. Selsky, 261 A.D.2d 404, 690 N.Y.S.2d 68 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Commissioner of the New York State Department of Correctional Services dated November 4, 1997, which confirmed a decision of a Hearing Officer dated September 5, 1997, which, after a hearing, found the petitioner guilty, inter alia, of refusing to follow a direct order, and imposed a penalty.

[405]*405Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs or disbursements, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits.

Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the misbehavior report provided substantial evidence to support the Hearing Officer’s determination finding him guilty of refusing to follow a direct order and making a false statement (see, Matter of Foster v Coughlin, 76 NY2d 964; Matter of Perez v Wilmot, 67 NY2d 615).

The petitioner’s remaining contentions are without merit. S. Miller, J. P., O’Brien, Ritter and Santucci, JJ., concur.

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

—Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Commissioner of the New York State Department of Correctional Services dated November 4, 1997, which confirmed a decision of a Hearing Officer dated September 5, 1997, which, after a hearing, found the petitioner guilty, inter alia, of refusing to follow a direct order, and imposed a penalty.

[405]*405Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs or disbursements, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits.

Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the misbehavior report provided substantial evidence to support the Hearing Officer’s determination finding him guilty of refusing to follow a direct order and making a false statement (see, Matter of Foster v Coughlin, 76 NY2d 964; Matter of Perez v Wilmot, 67 NY2d 615).

The petitioner’s remaining contentions are without merit. S. Miller, J. P., O’Brien, Ritter and Santucci, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

261 A.D.2d 404, 690 N.Y.S.2d 68, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lawrence-v-selsky-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack