Scott v. Kelly

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Scott v. Kelly

16 A.D.3d 109, 789 N.Y.S.2d 886, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2067

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

DecidedMarch 1, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 16 A.D.3d 109 (Scott v. Kelly) 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

Scott v. Kelly, 16 A.D.3d 109, 789 N.Y.S.2d 886, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2067 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment (denominated an order), Supreme Court, New York County (Carol R. Edmead, J.), entered October 30, 2003, which denied, as moot, the petition and dismissed the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 seeking an order directing respondent Police Department to provide the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) with notification that would permit DCJS to expunge incorrect information from petitioner’s criminal history records and directing the Department of Correctional Services respondents to reclassify petitioner’s security classification level, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Since the incorrect information was expunged from petitioner’s records, he received the relief requested, rendering the proceeding moot (see e.g. Matter of Siao-Pao v Travis, 5 AD3d 150 [2004], lv denied 3 NY3d 603 [2004]). Although administrative errors are likely to recur in any large agency, the issue presented is not so novel or so frequently occurring as to warrant invocation of the exception to the mootness doctrine (see Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707 [1980]; Matter of Higginbotham v New York State Off. of Temp. & Disability Assistance, 288 AD2d 70 [2001]). Concur—Buckley, EJ., Tom, Saxe, Friedman and Sweeny, JJ.

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

Judgment (denominated an order), Supreme Court, New York County (Carol R. Edmead, J.), entered October 30, 2003, which denied, as moot, the petition and dismissed the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 seeking an order directing respondent Police Department to provide the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) with notification that would permit DCJS to expunge incorrect information from petitioner’s criminal history records and directing the Department of Correctional Services respondents to reclassify petitioner’s security classification level, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Since the incorrect information was expunged from petitioner’s records, he received the relief requested, rendering the proceeding moot (see e.g. Matter of Siao-Pao v Travis, 5 AD3d 150 [2004], lv denied 3 NY3d 603 [2004]). Although administrative errors are likely to recur in any large agency, the issue presented is not so novel or so frequently occurring as to warrant invocation of the exception to the mootness doctrine (see Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707 [1980]; Matter of Higginbotham v New York State Off. of Temp. & Disability Assistance, 288 AD2d 70 [2001]). Concur—Buckley, EJ., Tom, Saxe, Friedman and Sweeny, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 A.D.3d 109, 789 N.Y.S.2d 886, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2067, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scott-v-kelly-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack