Massey v. Coughlin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Massey v. Coughlin

212 A.D.2d 909, 622 N.Y.S.2d 622, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1628

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

DecidedFebruary 16, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 212 A.D.2d 909 (Massey v. Coughlin) 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

Massey v. Coughlin, 212 A.D.2d 909, 622 N.Y.S.2d 622, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1628 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Lewis, J.), entered June 4, 1993 in Clinton County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services denying petitioner’s grievance.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, challenges a policy instituted by respondents in connection with an inmate “call home” program. Under this policy, inmates are limited to a total of 15 persons with whom they may communicate by telephone, whose names must be on an approved list. Contrary to petitioner’s assertions, this policy does not violate his constitutional right to free speech or contravene respondents’ own regulations.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, White, Casey and Yesawich Jr., 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 (Lewis, J.), entered June 4, 1993 in Clinton County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services denying petitioner’s grievance.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, challenges a policy instituted by respondents in connection with an inmate “call home” program. Under this policy, inmates are limited to a total of 15 persons with whom they may communicate by telephone, whose names must be on an approved list. Contrary to petitioner’s assertions, this policy does not violate his constitutional right to free speech or contravene respondents’ own regulations.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, White, Casey and Yesawich Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

212 A.D.2d 909, 622 N.Y.S.2d 622, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1628, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/massey-v-coughlin-nyappdiv-1995.