From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Briglin v. N.Y. State Dept. of Corr. & Cmty. Supervision

Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jun 3, 2022
2022 N.Y. Slip Op. 3601 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)

Opinion

No. 209 CA 21-00220

06-03-2022

IN THE MATTER OF TODD R. BRIGLIN, PETITIONER-APPELLANT, v. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND COMMUNITY SUPERVISION, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.

TODD R. BRIGLIN, PETITIONER-APPELLANT PRO SE. LETITIA JAMES, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (LAURA ETLINGER OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.


TODD R. BRIGLIN, PETITIONER-APPELLANT PRO SE.

LETITIA JAMES, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (LAURA ETLINGER OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.

PRESENT: PERADOTTO, J.P., LINDLEY, CURRAN, WINSLOW, AND BANNISTER, JJ.

Appeal from a judgment (denominated order) of the Supreme Court, Steuben County (Kevin M. Nasca, J.), entered December 28, 2020 in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78. The judgment, among other things, denied petitioner's motion for leave to reargue, granted respondent's motion for leave to reargue and, upon reargument, dismissed the petition.

It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs.

Memorandum: Petitioner appeals from a judgment that denied his motion for leave to reargue, granted the motion of respondent for leave to reargue and, upon reargument, dismissed the petition. The appeal from that part of the judgment denying petitioner's motion for leave to reargue must be dismissed inasmuch as no appeal lies therefrom (see People ex rel. Hinspeter v Artus, 159 A.D.3d 1539, 1540 [4th Dept 2018], lv dismissed 31 N.Y.3d 1139 [2018], rearg denied 32 N.Y.3d 1042 [2018]). Because petitioner was released to parole in December 2020, the remainder of the appeal must be dismissed as moot (see People ex rel. Luck v Squires, 173 A.D.3d 1767, 1767 [4th Dept 2019]; People ex rel. Seals v New York State Dept. of Correctional Servs., 32 A.D.3d 1262, 1263 [4th Dept 2006]). Contrary to petitioner's contention, we conclude that the exception to the mootness doctrine does not apply (see Luck, 173 A.D.3d at 1767-1768; People ex rel. Winters v Crowley, 166 A.D.3d 1525, 1525 [4th Dept 2018], lv denied 32 N.Y.3d 917 [2019]; see generally Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 N.Y.2d 707, 714-715 [1980]).


Summaries of

Briglin v. N.Y. State Dept. of Corr. & Cmty. Supervision

Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jun 3, 2022
2022 N.Y. Slip Op. 3601 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)
Case details for

Briglin v. N.Y. State Dept. of Corr. & Cmty. Supervision

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF TODD R. BRIGLIN, PETITIONER-APPELLANT, v. NEW YORK STATE…

Court:Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Jun 3, 2022

Citations

2022 N.Y. Slip Op. 3601 (N.Y. App. Div. 2022)