From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Matter of James Lewis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 8, 2007
37 A.D.3d 917 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)

Opinion

No. 500610.

February 8, 2007.

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.

James Lewis, Auburn, petitioner pro se.

Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, Albany (Wayne L. Benjamin of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Mercure, J.P., Peters, Carpinello, Mugglin and Kane, JJ.


Petitioner was found guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules after a tier III hearing and the determination was affirmed on administrative appeal with a modified penalty. He then commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging it. Since that time, the Attorney General has advised this Court that the determination has been administratively reversed and that all references thereto have been expunged from petitioner's institutional record. Inasmuch as petitioner has received all the relief to which he is entitled, the matter is dismissed as moot ( see Matter of Kalwasinski v Goord, 29 AD3d 1104, 1105).

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


Summaries of

In re Matter of James Lewis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 8, 2007
37 A.D.3d 917 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
Case details for

In re Matter of James Lewis

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of JAMES LEWIS, Petitioner, v. GLENN S. GOORD, as…

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

Date published: Feb 8, 2007

Citations

37 A.D.3d 917 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 1027
827 N.Y.S.2d 893

Citing Cases

Ward v. Goord

The Attorney General has advised this Court that such determination has been administratively reversed and…

Vernon V. Selsky

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