From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

PEOPLE EX REL. DE FULMER v. SCULLY

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 1, 1985
110 A.D.2d 671 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Opinion

April 1, 1985

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Leggett, J.).


Judgment reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and petition granted to the extent that the determination is annulled and the respondent is directed to expunge from petitioner's institutional records all reference to the charges underlying the superintendent's proceeding in question.

Respondent violated 7 NYCRR 251-5.1 by failing to commence a superintendent's hearing within seven days of petitioner's initial confinement to his cell. Moreover, petitioner's due process rights were violated by respondent's failure to provide him with a transcript of the superintendent's hearing ( see, Matter of Crudo v. Fogg, 69 A.D.2d 902; Matter of Hurley v. Ward, 61 A.D.2d 881; Matter of Walls v. Scully, 121 Misc.2d 698; Matter of Lozada v. Scully, 108 A.D.2d 859). Thompson, J.P., Bracken, O'Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

PEOPLE EX REL. DE FULMER v. SCULLY

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 1, 1985
110 A.D.2d 671 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)
Case details for

PEOPLE EX REL. DE FULMER v. SCULLY

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ex rel. CARL DE FULMER, Appellant, v…

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

Date published: Apr 1, 1985

Citations

110 A.D.2d 671 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Citing Cases

Matter of Wysinger v. Scully

The second extension was invalid in that it was sought and obtained after the first extension had expired,…

Matter of Johnson v. Scully

Pursuant to 7 NYCRR 251-5.1 (a), the appellants were required to commence the Superintendent's proceeding…