Lugo v. E. W. Jones

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lugo v. E. W. Jones

167 A.D.2d 636, 562 N.Y.S.2d 863, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13278

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

DecidedNovember 8, 1990

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 167 A.D.2d 636 (Lugo v. E. W. Jones) 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

Lugo v. E. W. Jones, 167 A.D.2d 636, 562 N.Y.S.2d 863, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13278 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Washington County) to review a determination of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

The evidence presented at the hearing, including the fight investigation report, the misbehavior report and the medical reports which showed injuries to another inmate, constitutes substantial evidence to support the determination that petitioner was fighting (see, Matter of Perez v Wilmot, 67 NY2d 615, 616). Petitioner also failed to raise any claim of error on administrative appeal with respect to his penalty of 30 days’ loss of privileges and, therefore, that issue has been waived (see, Matter of Hop Wah v Coughlin, 153 AD2d 999, lv denied 75 NY2d 705; Matter of McClean v LeFevre, 142 AD2d 911, 912).

Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Weiss, Levine and Harvey, JJ., concur.

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

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Washington County) to review a determination of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

The evidence presented at the hearing, including the fight investigation report, the misbehavior report and the medical reports which showed injuries to another inmate, constitutes substantial evidence to support the determination that petitioner was fighting (see, Matter of Perez v Wilmot, 67 NY2d 615, 616). Petitioner also failed to raise any claim of error on administrative appeal with respect to his penalty of 30 days’ loss of privileges and, therefore, that issue has been waived (see, Matter of Hop Wah v Coughlin, 153 AD2d 999, lv denied 75 NY2d 705; Matter of McClean v LeFevre, 142 AD2d 911, 912).

Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Weiss, Levine and Harvey, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

167 A.D.2d 636, 562 N.Y.S.2d 863, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13278, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lugo-v-e-w-jones-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack