From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In the Matter of Dmitra v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 15, 2004
8 A.D.3d 110 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

3884.

Decided June 15, 2004.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (James A. Yates, J.), entered October 23, 2003, dismissing, as moot, an article 78 proceeding seeking to compel the municipal respondents to replace respondents provisional employees with permanent employees and to reconsider petitioner's application for permanent appointment to the position in question, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Robert Julian Lashaw, New York, for appellant.

Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Suzanne K. Colt of counsel), for respondents.

Before: Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Sullivan, Lerner, Gonzalez, JJ.


By the time the proceeding had been submitted for decision, no provisional employees any longer worked in the position in question, no vacancies for that position any longer existed and the eligible list for promotion to the position had expired. Thus, any decision as to the legality of the challenged provisional appointments could have had no practical effect on petitioner's right to be considered for a permanent appointment. Accordingly, the proceeding was properly dismissed as moot ( see Saratoga County Chamber of Commerce v. Pataki, 100 N.Y.2d 801, 810-811).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

In the Matter of Dmitra v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 15, 2004
8 A.D.3d 110 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

In the Matter of Dmitra v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:IN RE JAMES DMITRA, Petitioner-Appellant, v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK, ET AL.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jun 15, 2004

Citations

8 A.D.3d 110 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
778 N.Y.S.2d 165

Citing Cases

Gordon v. Nisnewitz

Any issue as to the invalidity of the lien, however, is moot, as the lien has been discharged, so any…