From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Johnson v. Annucci

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
May 24, 2018
161 A.D.3d 1471 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)

Opinion

525255

05-24-2018

In the Matter of Johnathan JOHNSON, Appellant, v. Anthony J. ANNUCCI, as Acting Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision, et al., Respondents.

Jonathan Johnson, Malone, appellant pro se. Barbara D. Underwood, Attorney General, Albany (Kate H. Nepveu of counsel), for respondents.


Jonathan Johnson, Malone, appellant pro se.

Barbara D. Underwood, Attorney General, Albany (Kate H. Nepveu of counsel), for respondents.

Before: Garry, P.J., McCarthy, Clark, Rumsey and Pritzker, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDERAppeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Feldstein, J.), entered June 27, 2017 in Franklin County, which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, granted respondents' motion to dismiss the petition.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking a writ of mandamus to compel respondents to issue headphones, instead of earbuds, to him and other special housing inmates in accordance with the terms of the settlement agreement in Peoples v. Annucci, 180 F.Supp.3d 294 (S.D.N.Y. 2016). Supreme Court granted respondents' motion to dismiss the petition for lack of standing. Petitioner appeals.

We find no error in Supreme Court dismissing the petition. A review of the petition confirms that petitioner sought a writ of mandamus based upon the terms of the settlement agreement, not, as petitioner now asserts, on a Department of Corrections and Community Supervision directive pertaining to the issuance of headphones to inmates. As the terms of the settlement agreement specifically state that the terms and conditions of the settlement agreement can only be enforced by class counsel, Supreme Court properly dismissed the petition for lack of standing. Further, the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision directive was not raised in the petition as a basis for the relief sought and, therefore, it will not be considered on this appeal (see Matter of White v. Goord , 278 A.D.2d 694, 694, 718 N.Y.S.2d 237 [2000] ).

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

Garry, P.J., McCarthy, Clark, Rumsey and Pritzker, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Johnson v. Annucci

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
May 24, 2018
161 A.D.3d 1471 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)
Case details for

Johnson v. Annucci

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of JOHNATHAN JOHNSON, Appellant, v. ANTHONY J. ANNUCCI, as…

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

Date published: May 24, 2018

Citations

161 A.D.3d 1471 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)
73 N.Y.S.3d 914
2018 N.Y. Slip Op. 3788

Citing Cases

Johnson v. Aarone-Beane

The Appellate Division, Third Department has, alone, dismissed, or affirmed the dismissal of, twenty-seven…