Valdez v. Mann

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Valdez v. Mann

227 A.D.2d 697, 642 N.Y.S.2d 563, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4720

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

DecidedMay 2, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 227 A.D.2d 697 (Valdez v. Mann) 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

Valdez v. Mann, 227 A.D.2d 697, 642 N.Y.S.2d 563, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4720 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Teresi, J.), entered February 28,1995 in Ulster County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, for lack of proper service.

Petitioner, an inmate at Shawangunk Correctional Facility in Ulster County, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a policy restricting inmates’ access to the law library under certain circumstances. We are, however, precluded from addressing the merits of petitioner’s claim given that he has failed to comply with the service requirements contained in the order to show cause (see, Matter of Hoyer v Coughlin, 179 AD2d 921). Accordingly, we find that Supreme Court properly dismissed the petition.

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, Casey, Yesawich Jr. and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

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 February 28,1995 in Ulster County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, for lack of proper service.

Petitioner, an inmate at Shawangunk Correctional Facility in Ulster County, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a policy restricting inmates’ access to the law library under certain circumstances. We are, however, precluded from addressing the merits of petitioner’s claim given that he has failed to comply with the service requirements contained in the order to show cause (see, Matter of Hoyer v Coughlin, 179 AD2d 921). Accordingly, we find that Supreme Court properly dismissed the petition.

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, Casey, Yesawich Jr. and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

227 A.D.2d 697, 642 N.Y.S.2d 563, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4720, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/valdez-v-mann-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack