Matter of Frantz v. Smith

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Frantz v. Smith

137 A.D.3d 1385, 26 N.Y.S.3d 485

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

DecidedMarch 10, 2016

Docket521002

StatusPublished

This text of 137 A.D.3d 1385 (Matter of Frantz v. Smith) 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

Matter of Frantz v. Smith, 137 A.D.3d 1385, 26 N.Y.S.3d 485 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Cahill, J.), entered March 27, 2015 in Ulster County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent finding petitioner guilty of violating certain disciplinary rules.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge a tier II disciplinary determination finding him guilty of refusing a direct order and creating a disturbance. Supreme Court dismissed the petition, prompting this appeal. The Attorney General has informed this Court that the determination has been administratively reversed, all references thereto have been expunged from petitioner’s institutional record and the mandatory $5 surcharge has been refunded to petitioner’s inmate account. In view of this, and given that petitioner has received all the relief to which he is entitled, this appeal has been rendered moot and must be dismissed (see Matter of Lashway v Fischer, 112 AD3d 1172, 1172 [2013]). Petitioner’s request for costs and expenses incurred must be made by way of application to the court of original instance (see CPLR 8601 [b]; Matter of Ferguson v Fischer, 115 AD3d 1105, 1106 [2014]).

Peters, P.J., McCarthy, Garry and Clark, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, 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 (Cahill, J.), entered March 27, 2015 in Ulster County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent finding petitioner guilty of violating certain disciplinary rules.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge a tier II disciplinary determination finding him guilty of refusing a direct order and creating a disturbance. Supreme Court dismissed the petition, prompting this appeal. The Attorney General has informed this Court that the determination has been administratively reversed, all references thereto have been expunged from petitioner’s institutional record and the mandatory $5 surcharge has been refunded to petitioner’s inmate account. In view of this, and given that petitioner has received all the relief to which he is entitled, this appeal has been rendered moot and must be dismissed (see Matter of Lashway v Fischer, 112 AD3d 1172, 1172 [2013]). Petitioner’s request for costs and expenses incurred must be made by way of application to the court of original instance (see CPLR 8601 [b]; Matter of Ferguson v Fischer, 115 AD3d 1105, 1106 [2014]).

Peters, P.J., McCarthy, Garry and Clark, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

137 A.D.3d 1385, 26 N.Y.S.3d 485, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-frantz-v-smith-nyappdiv-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack