Matter of Thousand v. Kirkpatrick

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Thousand v. Kirkpatrick

2017 NY Slip Op 6585, 153 A.D.3d 1506, 59 N.Y.S.3d 919

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

DecidedSeptember 21, 2017

Docket524286

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 6585 (Matter of Thousand v. Kirkpatrick) 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 Thousand v. Kirkpatrick, 2017 NY Slip Op 6585, 153 A.D.3d 1506, 59 N.Y.S.3d 919 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

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

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding chan *1507 lenging a tier II determination finding him guilty of fighting. The Attorney General has advised 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. Additionally, “petitioner is not entitled to be restored to the status he enjoyed prior to the disciplinary determination” (Matter of West v Annucci, 134 AD3d 1379, 1380 [2015]). Accordingly, as petitioner has received all of the relief to which he is entitled, the petition must be dismissed as moot (see Matter of Micolo v Kirkpatrick, 147 AD3d 1131, 1131 [2017]). As the record reflects that petitioner paid a reduced filing fee of $15 and he has requested a refund thereof, he is entitled to reimbursement of that sum (see Matter of Cendales v Sheahan, 146 AD3d 1260, 1261 [2017]).

Peters, P.J., Garry, Rose, Clark and Rumsey, JJ., concur.

Adjudged that the petition is dismissed, as moot, without costs, but with disbursements in the amount of $15.

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 Clinton County) to review a determination of respondent finding petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding chan *1507 lenging a tier II determination finding him guilty of fighting. The Attorney General has advised 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. Additionally, “petitioner is not entitled to be restored to the status he enjoyed prior to the disciplinary determination” (Matter of West v Annucci, 134 AD3d 1379, 1380 [2015]). Accordingly, as petitioner has received all of the relief to which he is entitled, the petition must be dismissed as moot (see Matter of Micolo v Kirkpatrick, 147 AD3d 1131, 1131 [2017]). As the record reflects that petitioner paid a reduced filing fee of $15 and he has requested a refund thereof, he is entitled to reimbursement of that sum (see Matter of Cendales v Sheahan, 146 AD3d 1260, 1261 [2017]).

Peters, P.J., Garry, Rose, Clark and Rumsey, JJ., concur.

Adjudged that the petition is dismissed, as moot, without costs, but with disbursements in the amount of $15.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2017 NY Slip Op 6585, 153 A.D.3d 1506, 59 N.Y.S.3d 919, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-thousand-v-kirkpatrick-nyappdiv-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack