Matter of Zoccoli v. Annucci

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Zoccoli v. Annucci

140 A.D.3d 1512, 33 N.Y.S.3d 768

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

DecidedJune 23, 2016

Docket521978

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 140 A.D.3d 1512 (Matter of Zoccoli v. Annucci) 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 Zoccoli v. Annucci, 140 A.D.3d 1512, 33 N.Y.S.3d 768 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

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

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge a prison disciplinary determination. The Attorney General has advised this Court that the determination at issue 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, the petition must be dismissed as moot (see Matter of Roye v Annucci, 137 AD3d 1392, 1393 [2016]; Matter of James v Prack, 137 AD3d 1390, 1391 [2016]). Although not mentioned by the Attorney General, we note that the loss of good time that was imposed as part of the penalty must also be restored to petitioner (see Matter of Corrieri v Annucci, 137 AD3d 1407, 1408 [2016]; Matter of Moore v Prack, 134 AD3d 1381, 1381 [2015]). Under the circumstances presented, however, we deny petitioner’s request for reimbursement of counsel fees and miscellaneous expenditures that are not substantiated by the record.

McCarthy, J.P., Garry, Egan Jr., Clark and Mulvey, 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 Albany County) to review a determination of respondent finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge a prison disciplinary determination. The Attorney General has advised this Court that the determination at issue 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, the petition must be dismissed as moot (see Matter of Roye v Annucci, 137 AD3d 1392, 1393 [2016]; Matter of James v Prack, 137 AD3d 1390, 1391 [2016]). Although not mentioned by the Attorney General, we note that the loss of good time that was imposed as part of the penalty must also be restored to petitioner (see Matter of Corrieri v Annucci, 137 AD3d 1407, 1408 [2016]; Matter of Moore v Prack, 134 AD3d 1381, 1381 [2015]). Under the circumstances presented, however, we deny petitioner’s request for reimbursement of counsel fees and miscellaneous expenditures that are not substantiated by the record.

McCarthy, J.P., Garry, Egan Jr., Clark and Mulvey, 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)

140 A.D.3d 1512, 33 N.Y.S.3d 768, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-zoccoli-v-annucci-nyappdiv-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack