McKeown v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

McKeown v. Goord

265 A.D.2d 760, 697 N.Y.S.2d 708, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10912

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

DecidedOctober 28, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 265 A.D.2d 760 (McKeown v. Goord) 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

McKeown v. Goord, 265 A.D.2d 760, 697 N.Y.S.2d 708, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10912 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Teresi, J.), entered November 20, 1998 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent denying his request for merit time allowance.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging respondent’s determination finding that petitioner was not eligible for merit time allowance (see, Correction Law § 803 [3]) due to his “refusal to participate in programs/treatment recommended by department staff”. Supreme Court dismissed the petition on the ground that petitioner failed to exhaust his administrative remedies in that he did not file a grievance with respect to the denial of merit time. Petitioner appeals.

Respondent concedes, and we agree, that inasmuch as the record indicates that petitioner had inquired into the review process and was informed that there was no grievance procedure available, it was error to dismiss the petition for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Accordingly, the matter should be remitted to Supreme Court to address the merits.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Spain, Carpinello and Mugglin, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the facts, without costs, petition reinstated and matter remitted to the Supreme Court for further proceedings not inconsistent with this Court’s decision.

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

—Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Teresi, J.), entered November 20, 1998 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent denying his request for merit time allowance.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging respondent’s determination finding that petitioner was not eligible for merit time allowance (see, Correction Law § 803 [3]) due to his “refusal to participate in programs/treatment recommended by department staff”. Supreme Court dismissed the petition on the ground that petitioner failed to exhaust his administrative remedies in that he did not file a grievance with respect to the denial of merit time. Petitioner appeals.

Respondent concedes, and we agree, that inasmuch as the record indicates that petitioner had inquired into the review process and was informed that there was no grievance procedure available, it was error to dismiss the petition for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Accordingly, the matter should be remitted to Supreme Court to address the merits.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Spain, Carpinello and Mugglin, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the facts, without costs, petition reinstated and matter remitted to the Supreme Court for further proceedings not inconsistent with this Court’s decision.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

265 A.D.2d 760, 697 N.Y.S.2d 708, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10912, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mckeown-v-goord-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack