People ex rel. Wright v. Scoralick

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Wright v. Scoralick

260 A.D.2d 515, 686 N.Y.S.2d 329, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3803

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

DecidedApril 12, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 260 A.D.2d 515 (People ex rel. Wright v. Scoralick) 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

People ex rel. Wright v. Scoralick, 260 A.D.2d 515, 686 N.Y.S.2d 329, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3803 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a habeas corpus proceeding, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Hillery, J.), dated August 12, 1997, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

As the petitioner concedes, the issue raised on this appeal is academic. Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the instant matter does not qualify as an exception to the mootness rule (cf., Matter of Brown v Appelman, 241 AD2d 279, 282-283), inter alia, because the issue raised has already been decided by the Court of Appeals (see, e.g., Matter of Angel A., 92 NY2d 430; People v Swamp, 84 NY2d 725). Altman, J. P., Friedmann, McGinity and Luciano, JJ., concur.

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

—In a habeas corpus proceeding, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Hillery, J.), dated August 12, 1997, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

As the petitioner concedes, the issue raised on this appeal is academic. Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the instant matter does not qualify as an exception to the mootness rule (cf., Matter of Brown v Appelman, 241 AD2d 279, 282-283), inter alia, because the issue raised has already been decided by the Court of Appeals (see, e.g., Matter of Angel A., 92 NY2d 430; People v Swamp, 84 NY2d 725). Altman, J. P., Friedmann, McGinity and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

260 A.D.2d 515, 686 N.Y.S.2d 329, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3803, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-wright-v-scoralick-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack