Saunders v. Goord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Saunders v. Goord

16 A.D.3d 740, 790 N.Y.S.2d 327, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2129

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

DecidedMarch 3, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 16 A.D.3d 740 (Saunders 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

Saunders v. Goord, 16 A.D.3d 740, 790 N.Y.S.2d 327, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2129 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

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 Superintendent of Clinton Correctional Facility which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a determination finding him guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rules prohibiting interference with an employee and refusing a direct order. The Attorney General has advised this Court by letter that the determination at issue has been administratively reversed and that all references thereto have been expunged from petitioner’s institutional record. Inasmuch as petitioner has received all the relief to which he is entitled and is no longer aggrieved, the matter is dismissed as moot (see Matter of Maldonado v Goord, 296 AD2d 807 [2002]).

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Spain, Mugglin and Kane, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the petition is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

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 Superintendent of Clinton Correctional Facility which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a determination finding him guilty of violating the prison disciplinary rules prohibiting interference with an employee and refusing a direct order. The Attorney General has advised this Court by letter that the determination at issue has been administratively reversed and that all references thereto have been expunged from petitioner’s institutional record. Inasmuch as petitioner has received all the relief to which he is entitled and is no longer aggrieved, the matter is dismissed as moot (see Matter of Maldonado v Goord, 296 AD2d 807 [2002]).

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Spain, Mugglin and Kane, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the petition is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 A.D.3d 740, 790 N.Y.S.2d 327, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2129, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/saunders-v-goord-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack