Sykes v. Fischer, 98 A.D.3d 769 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2012). · Go Syfert
Sykes v. Fischer, 98 A.D.3d 769 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2012). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
15 citation events (15 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Cited for
At page 770 Dismissing a petition as moot after relief granted12 citing casesMatter of Applegate v Fischer, 89 AD 3d 1303, 1304 [2011]). Thus, petitioner has been afforded all the relief to which he is entitled, and the petition must be…opening of page *770 (no citing court says what it cites this page for) · 6 listed here
  • Hinton v. Rock, 108 A.D.3d 981 (N.Y. App. Div. 4th Dep't 2013).published 2 cites
    Inasmuch as petitioner has received all the relief to which he is entitled, the petition must be dismissed as moot (see Matter of Jordan v Fischer, 98 AD3d 788, 788 [2012]; Matter of Sykes v Fischer, 98 AD3d 769, 770 [2012]).
  • Canales-Sanchez v. Schneiderman, 107 A.D.3d 1258 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2013).published 2 cites
    Consequently, inasmuch as petitioner has received all the relief to which he is entitled, the petition must be dismissed as moot (see Matter of Sykes v Fischer, 98 AD3d 769, 770 [2012]; Matter of Marcial v Fischer, 96 AD3d 1245, 1246 [2012…
  • Oliver v. Fischer, 107 A.D.3d 1276 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2013).published 2 cites
    Inasmuch as petitioner has received all the relief to which he is entitled, the petition must be dismissed as moot (see Matter of Jordan v Fischer, 98 AD3d 788, 788 [2012]; Matter of Sykes v Fischer, 98 AD3d 769, 770 [2012]).
  • Bailey v. Fischer, 106 A.D.3d 1349 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2013).published 2 cites
    Inasmuch as petitioner has received all the relief to which he is entitled, the petition must be dismissed as moot (see Matter of Sykes v Fischer, 98 AD3d 769, 770 [2012]; Matter of Kalwasinski v Fischer, 92 AD3d 1069, 1069-1070 [2012]).
  • Gillard v. Maly, 106 A.D.3d 1347 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2013).published 2 cites
    Inasmuch as petitioner has received all the relief to which he is entitled, the petition must be dismissed as moot (see Matter of Santiago v Fischer, 101 AD3d 1206, 1206 [2012]; Matter of Sykes v Fischer, 98 AD3d 769, 770 [2012]).
  • Brown v. Fischer, 106 A.D.3d 1347 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2013).published 2 cites
    Inasmuch as petitioner has received all the relief to which he is entitled, the petition must be dismissed as moot (see Matter of Murgo v Racette, 100 AD3d 1244 [2012]; Matter of Sykes v Fischer, 98 AD3d 769, 770 [2012]).
At page 769 � Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of…3 citing casesopening of page *769 (no citing court says what it cites this page for) · 2 listed here
  • W.Y.N.N. v. Fischer, 120 A.D.3d 1467 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2014).published 2 cites
    With respect to petitioner’s request that he be restored to the status he enjoyed prior to the disciplinary determination, “inmates have no constitutional or statutory right to their prior housing or programming status” (Matter of Hamilton…
  • MatterofWynnvFischer, No. 517577 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't Sept. 11, 2014).published
    With respect to petitioner's request that he be restored to the status he enjoyed prior to the disciplinary determination, "inmates have no -2- 517577 constitutional or statutory right to their prior housing or programming status" (Matter…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of Mellsun Sykes
v.
Brian Fischer, as Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Aug 2, 2012.
Published opinion
98 A.D.3d 769
Cited by 15 opinions  |  Published

— Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a determination finding him guilty of violating numerous prison disciplinary rules. The Attorney General has informed this Court that the determination at issue has been administratively reversed, all references thereto expunged from petitioner’s institutional record and the $5 mandatory surcharge has been refunded to his inmate account. Although petitioner requests that he be restored to the status he enjoyed prior to the tier III hearing, inmates do not have a constitutional or statutory right to their prior housing or programming status (see Matter of Hamilton v Bezio, 93 AD3d 1049, 1050 [2012];[*770] Matter of Applegate v Fischer, 89 AD 3d 1303, 1304 [2011]). Thus, petitioner has been afforded all the relief to which he is entitled, and the petition must be dismissed as moot (see Matter of Kalwasinski v Fischer, 92 AD3d 1069, 1069-1070 [2012]).

Mercure, J.P., Spain, Stein, Garry and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Adjudged that the petition is dismissed, as moot, without costs.