From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wilson v. Bezio

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Mar 22, 2012
93 A.D.3d 1053 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)

Opinion

2012-03-22

In the Matter of George WILSON, Appellant, v. Norman R. BEZIO, as Director of Special Housing and Inmate Disciplinary Programs, Respondent.

George Wilson, Attica, appellant pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (William E. Storrs of counsel), for respondent.


George Wilson, Attica, appellant pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (William E. Storrs of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Platkin, J.), entered February 17, 2011 in Albany County, which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, granted respondent's motion to dismiss the petition.

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge a prison disciplinary determination. Respondent moved to dismiss the petition for lack of personal jurisdiction based upon petitioner's failure to comply with the service requirements of the order to show cause. Supreme Court granted the motion and petitioner appeals.

Petitioner has not raised any arguments in his brief concerning the propriety of Supreme Court's dismissal of the petition on jurisdictional grounds. Consequently, any such arguments are deemed abandoned ( see Matter of Jones v. Fischer, 84 A.D.3d 1604, 1605, 922 N.Y.S.2d 879 [2011]; Matter of Bunting v. Fischer, 84 A.D.3d 1631, 1632, 922 N.Y.S.2d 830 [2011], lv. denied 17 N.Y.3d 709, 2011 WL 4089762 [2011] ). Petitioner advances only substantive arguments for the annulment of the prison disciplinary determination. However, this Court cannot review the merits of the prison disciplinary determination in the absence of personal jurisdiction over the parties ( see Matter of Spirles v. Goord, 273 A.D.2d 568, 568–569, 710 N.Y.S.2d 553 [2000], lv. dismissed 96 N.Y.2d 928, 733 N.Y.S.2d 364, 759 N.E.2d 362 [2001]; Matter of Seifert v. Selsky, 260 A.D.2d 823, 824, 687 N.Y.S.2d 305 [1999]. Nor do we discern any error in Supreme Court's determination that such jurisdiction was not obtained. Therefore, the judgment is affirmed.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

ROSE, J.P., MALONE JR., STEIN, McCARTHY and EGAN JR., JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Wilson v. Bezio

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Mar 22, 2012
93 A.D.3d 1053 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
Case details for

Wilson v. Bezio

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of George WILSON, Appellant, v. Norman R. BEZIO, as Director…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

Date published: Mar 22, 2012

Citations

93 A.D.3d 1053 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
940 N.Y.S.2d 496
2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 2142

Citing Cases

Pine v. Annucci

Petitioner does not raise in his brief any arguments concerning the propriety of Supreme Court's dismissal of…

Miller v. Brereton

GARRY, J. (concurring in part and dissenting in part). Neither party directly briefed the issue upon which…