From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Kairis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 28, 2011
86 A.D.3d 868 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)

Opinion

No. 505369.

July 28, 2011.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Paul Kairis, Elmira, petitioner pro se.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Martin A. Hotvet of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Peters, J.P., Rose, Malone Jr., Stein and Egan Jr., JJ.


Petitioner, a prison inmate, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge a tier III disciplinary determination finding him guilty of smuggling and property damage. The Attorney General has informed this Court that the determination has been administratively reversed, all reference thereto expunged from petitioner's institutional record and the mandatory $5 surcharge credited back to his inmate account. As such, petitioner has received all the relief to which he is entitled and the petition must be dismissed as moot ( see Matter of Quinones v Fischer, 82 AD3d 1445, 1445-1446; Matter of Mastropietro v Fischer, 81 AD3d 1022).

Adjudged that the petition is dismissed, as moot, without costs.


Summaries of

In re Kairis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 28, 2011
86 A.D.3d 868 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
Case details for

In re Kairis

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of PAUL KAIRIS, Petitioner, v. BRIAN FISCHER, as…

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

Date published: Jul 28, 2011

Citations

86 A.D.3d 868 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 6049
927 N.Y.S.2d 611

Citing Cases

Kalwasinski v. Fischer

The Attorney General has advised this Court that the determination has been administratively reversed, all…

In Matter of Campbell v. Fischer

The Attorney General has informed this Court that the determination at issue has been administratively…