Tafari v. Leclaire, 79 A.D.3d 1539 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010). · Go Syfert
Search
Tafari v. Leclaire, 79 A.D.3d 1539 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
6 citation events (6 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Matter of Murphy v. New York State Dept. of Corr. & Community Supervision (nyappdiv, 2026-03-05)
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Murphy v. New York State Dept. of Corr. & Community Supervision
N.Y. App. Div. · 2026 · confidence medium
Thus, given that petitioner received the ultimate relief sought in the petition, she is no longer aggrieved and her appeal must be dismissed as moot ( see Matter of Adams v Venettozzi , 163 AD3d 1392 , 1393 [3d Dept 2018]; Matter of Tafari v Leclaire , 79 AD3d 1539, 1540 [3d Dept 2010], lv denied 16 NY3d 709 [2011]), and the mootness exception does not apply ( see People ex rel.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Kairis v. Fischer
N.Y. App. Div. · 2017 · confidence medium
Moreover, petitioner could request paper through the law library, and that portion of petitioner’s grievance concerning his commissary privileges became moot upon petitioner’s return to the general population (see Matter of Shoga v Annucci, 122 AD3d at 1181 ; Matter of Tafari v Leclaire, 79 AD3d 1539, 1540 [2010], Iv denied 16 NY3d 709 [2011]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Kairis v. Fischer
N.Y. App. Div. · 2017 · confidence medium
Moreover, petitioner could request paper through the law library, and that portion of petitioner’s grievance concerning his commissary privileges became moot upon petitioner’s return to the general population (see Matter of Shoga v Annucci, 122 AD3d at 1181 ; Matter of Tafari v Leclaire, 79 AD3d 1539, 1540 [2010], Iv denied 16 NY3d 709 [2011]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Kairis v. Fischer
N.Y. App. Div. · 2017 · confidence medium
Moreover, petitioner could request paper through the law library, and that portion of petitioner’s grievance concerning his commissary privileges became moot upon petitioner’s return to the general population (see Matter of Shoga v Annucci, 122 AD3d at 1181 ; Matter of Tafari v Leclaire, 79 AD3d 1539, 1540 [2010], Iv denied 16 NY3d 709 [2011]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Shoga v. Annucci
N.Y. App. Div. · 2014 · confidence medium
Inasmuch as petitioner was transferred out of the Green Haven Correctional Facility, he is no longer aggrieved by the specific conditions of the observation cell at that facility and, thus, any arguments with regard to that grievance are moot (see Matter of Tafari v Leclaire, 79 AD3d 1539, 1540 [2010], lv denied 16 NY3d 709 [2011]; Matter of Rush v Bellamy, 71 AD3d 1298, 1298 [2010]; Matter of Bermudez v Fischer, 55 AD3d 1099, 1100 [2008] , lv denied 11 NY3d 714 [2009], cert denied 558 US 845 [2009] ).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Shoga v. Annucci
N.Y. App. Div. · 2014 · confidence medium
Inasmuch as petitioner was transferred out of the Green Haven Correctional Facility, he is no longer aggrieved by the specific conditions of the observation cell at that facility and, thus, any arguments with regard to that grievance are moot (see Matter of Tafari v Leclaire, 79 AD3d 1539, 1540 [2010], lv denied 16 NY3d 709 [2011]; Matter of Rush v Bellamy, 71 AD3d 1298, 1298 [2010]; Matter of Bermudez v Fischer, 55 AD3d 1099, 1100 [2008] , lv denied 11 NY3d 714 [2009], cert denied 558 US 845 [2009] ).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of Injah Tafari
v.
Lucien Leclaire, as Commissioner of Correctional Services
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Dec 30, 2010.
79 A.D.3d 1539
Cited by 5 opinions  |  Published

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Devine, J.), entered November 2, 2007 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent restricting petitioner’s visitation privileges.

In 2005, while an inmate at Eastern Correctional Facility in Ulster County, certain visitation restrictions were placed on petitioner following a visiting room incident in which he destroyed property and injured several correction officers. Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking to annul the determination restricting his visitation. Supreme Court dismissed the petition, and petitioner now appeals.

As we noted previously in our decision in Matter of Tafari v [*1540] Goord (55 AD3d 1176 [2008]), once petitioner was transferred to Clinton Correctional Facility in Clinton County in 2007, and the visitation restrictions ceased to be effective, his challenge to the determination was rendered moot. His current challenge to that determination is also moot, particularly when petitioner was transferred to Upstate Correctional Facility in Franklin County in July 2010, where there are currently no visitation restrictions imposed upon him (see Matter of Tafari v Fischer, 76 AD3d 1149 [2010]).

Mercure, J.E, Peters, Rose, Kavanagh and Garry, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.