From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Tonashka v. Weinberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 24, 2000
268 A.D.2d 525 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

Argued November 8, 1999

January 24, 2000

In a hybrid proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review the determination of the Rockland County Department of Social Services dated June 23, 1998, that the petitioner was ineligible for emergency housing assistance and an action for a judgment declaring that she is eligible for such assistance, Noah Weinberg, the Commissioner of the Rockland County Department of Social Services, and Brian Wing, the Commissioner of the New York State Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance, appeal from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Miller, J.), dated September 23, 1998, which, inter alia, granted the petitioner's motion for summary judgment to the extent of declaring that she was eligible for benefits as long as she is an alien permanently residing in the United States under color of law, annulled the determination of the Rockland County Department of Social Services dated June 23, 1998, and remitted the matter for a reevaluation of the plaintiff's eligiblity for public assistance.

Gary C. Samuels, Pomona, N.Y., for appellant Noah Weinberg (no brief filed).

Eliot L. Spitzer, Attorney-General, New York, N.Y. (Michael S. Belohlavek, Lyssa M. Sampson, and Adam L. Aronson of counsel), for appellant Brian Wing.

Steven Brown, White Plains, N.Y. (Robert F. Graziano of counsel; Yan Glickberg and Dawn Warren on the brief), for respondent.

FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., DANIEL W. JOY, ANITA R. FLORIO, DANIEL F. LUCIANO, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the appeals are dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

After the appeals were taken, the petitioner's immigration status changed to one pursuant to which she is eligible for public assistance. Thus, any determination by this court will not affect the rights of the parties. The matter does not warrant invoking an exception to the mootness doctrine (see, Matter of Hearst Corp. v. Clyne, 50 N.Y.2d 707, 714 ).

SANTUCCI, J.P., JOY, FLORIO, and LUCIANO, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Tonashka v. Weinberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 24, 2000
268 A.D.2d 525 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Matter of Tonashka v. Weinberg

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of SAVKA TONASHKA, respondent, v. NOAH WEINBERG, etc., et…

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

Date published: Jan 24, 2000

Citations

268 A.D.2d 525 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
701 N.Y.S.2d 647

Citing Cases

Matter of Tonashka v. Weinberg [2d Dept 2000

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion, the papers filed in opposition thereto, and the argument of…