From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sylvester v. Fischer

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Jan 2, 2015
124 A.D.3d 1411 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)

Opinion

01-02-2015

In the Matter of Peter SYLVESTER, Petitioner–Appellant, v. Brian FISCHER, Commissioner, New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, Respondent–Respondent.

Wyoming County–Attica Legal Aid Bureau, Warsaw (Adam W. Koch of Counsel), for Petitioner–Appellant. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Martin A. Hotvet of Counsel), for Respondent–Respondent.


Wyoming County–Attica Legal Aid Bureau, Warsaw (Adam W. Koch of Counsel), for Petitioner–Appellant.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Martin A. Hotvet of Counsel), for Respondent–Respondent.

PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., FAHEY, LINDLEY, SCONIERS, and WHALEN, JJ.

MEMORANDUM: Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking to annul the determination that denied his inmate grievance while he was incarcerated at Attica Correctional Facility (Attica). Petitioner correctly concedes that two of the claims in his grievance are moot inasmuch as he has since been transferred to another correctional facility, and we agree with respondent that the third claim likewise presents no justiciable controversy. Petitioner's third claim was that Attica was improperly applying decisions rendered by the Central Office Review Committee (CORC) to inmates at Attica. According to petitioner's inmate grievance form, "CORC decisions that did not originate at grievant's current facility should not be applied to this facility." As an example, petitioner cited a CORC decision that prohibits inmates from possessing a particular brand of radios. Because " the rights of the parties cannot be affected by the determination of this appeal," it must be dismissed as moot (Matter of Hearst Corp. v. Clyne, 50 N.Y.2d 707, 714, 431 N.Y.S.2d 400, 409 N.E.2d 876 ). Even assuming, arguendo, that the exception to the mootness doctrine applies with respect to petitioner's third claim (see generally id. at 714–715, 431 N.Y.S.2d 400, 409 N.E.2d 876 ), we conclude that petitioner failed to demonstrate that respondent's denial of that claim was "arbitrary or capricious or without a rational basis" (Matter of Patel v. Fischer, 67 A.D.3d 1193, 1193, 889 N.Y.S.2d 113, lv. denied 14 N.Y.3d 703, 2010 WL 547601 ). It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs.


Summaries of

Sylvester v. Fischer

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Jan 2, 2015
124 A.D.3d 1411 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)
Case details for

Sylvester v. Fischer

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Peter SYLVESTER, Petitioner–Appellant, v. Brian FISCHER…

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

Date published: Jan 2, 2015

Citations

124 A.D.3d 1411 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)
1 N.Y.S.3d 709

Citing Cases

Green v. Uhler

As such, the Court found that based upon his transfer, petitioner was no longer aggrieved by Upstate's staff…

Green v. Uhler

The Court therefore found that petitioner's challenges to the grievance proceedings had been rendered moot by…