first disciplinary hearing (New York) · Go Syfert
← New York issues

first disciplinary hearing in New York

6 New York opinions name it 1 courts 1976–2021 1 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (8)

CaseFollowedCited
Hinton v. Fischergreen
nyappdiv · 2013 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2021–2021
1 sentence

2021The documents were redundant in light of petitioner's hearing testimony and the Hearing Officer's acceptance of the fact that petitioner had previously filed them ( see Matter of Cruz v Annucci , 149 AD3d 1446, 1447 [2017]; Matter of Hinton v Fischer , 108 AD3d 1000, 1002 [2013]).

11
Cruz v. Annuccigreen
nyappdiv · 2017 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2021–2021
1 sentence

2021The documents were redundant in light of petitioner's hearing testimony and the Hearing Officer's acceptance of the fact that petitioner had previously filed them ( see Matter of Cruz v Annucci , 149 AD3d 1446, 1447 [2017]; Matter of Hinton v Fischer , 108 AD3d 1000, 1002 [2013]).

11
Wigfall v. Goordgreen
nyappdiv · 2008 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010
1 sentence

2010Substantial evidence, consisting of the misbehavior report and the testimony adduced at the first disciplinary hearing, supports the determination finding petitioner guilty of creating a disturbance and making threats (see Matter of Wigfall v Goord, 53 AD3d 943, 943 [2008]; Matter of Lewis v Goord, 43 AD3d 1259 [2007], lv dismissed 9 NY3d 1030 [2008]).

11
Britt v. Fischergreen
nyappdiv · 2008 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010
1 sentence

2010The determination finding petitioner guilty of conspiring to assault an inmate and engaging in violent conduct is supported by substantial evidence consisting not only of the misbehavior report and the testimony of its author, but also the confidential information considered by the Hearing Officer in camera (see Matter of Hill v Fischer, 69 AD3d 1103, 1103 [2010]; Matter of Britt v Fischer, 54 AD3d 1087, 1087 [2008]).

11
Hill v. Fischergreen
nyappdiv · 2010 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010
1 sentence

2010The determination finding petitioner guilty of conspiring to assault an inmate and engaging in violent conduct is supported by substantial evidence consisting not only of the misbehavior report and the testimony of its author, but also the confidential information considered by the Hearing Officer in camera (see Matter of Hill v Fischer, 69 AD3d 1103, 1103 [2010]; Matter of Britt v Fischer, 54 AD3d 1087, 1087 [2008]).

11
Marquez v. Manngreen
nyappdiv · 1992 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2005–2005
1 sentence

2005Finally, nothing in this record required the Hearing Officer to disqualify himself from presiding over the first disciplinary hearing as the Hearing Officer was not involved in the investigation of the case (see 7 NYCRR 254.1; see also Matter of Marquez v Mann, 188 AD2d 956, 956 [1992]).

11
Cayenne v. Goordgreen
nyappdiv · 2005 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2005–2005
1 sentence

2005In any event, there is no evidence that the Hearing Officer was biased or that the determination flowed from any alleged bias (see Matter of Cayenne v Goord, 16 AD3d 782, 783-784 [2005]; Matter of Rosa v Coombe, 238 AD2d 814, 815 [1997], appeal dismissed 90 NY2d 900 [1997]).

11
Rosa v. Coombegreen
nyappdiv · 1997 · cited in 1 New York opinions naming this issue, 2005–2005
1 sentence

2005In any event, there is no evidence that the Hearing Officer was biased or that the determination flowed from any alleged bias (see Matter of Cayenne v Goord, 16 AD3d 782, 783-784 [2005]; Matter of Rosa v Coombe, 238 AD2d 814, 815 [1997], appeal dismissed 90 NY2d 900 [1997]).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
Lewis v. Goord green
nyappdiv · 2007
1 sentence

2010Substantial evidence, consisting of the misbehavior report and the testimony adduced at the first disciplinary hearing, supports the determination finding petitioner guilty of creating a disturbance and making threats (see Matter of Wigfall v Goord, 53 AD3d 943, 943 [2008]; Matter of Lewis v Goord, 43 AD3d 1259 [2007], lv dismissed 9 NY3d 1030 [2008]).

12010–2010
Johnson v. Pataki neutral
ny · 1997
1 sentence

2005In any event, there is no evidence that the Hearing Officer was biased or that the determination flowed from any alleged bias (see Matter of Cayenne v Goord, 16 AD3d 782, 783-784 [2005]; Matter of Rosa v Coombe, 238 AD2d 814, 815 [1997], appeal dismissed 90 NY2d 900 [1997]).

12005–2005
Sowell v. Goord green
nyappdiv · 2002
1 sentence

2003When this behavior was compounded by petitioner’s thrusting of a manual at the Hearing Officer, the decision to expel him from the hearing was entirely proper (see Matter of Sowell v Goord, 295 AD2d 835 [2002]).

12003–2003
Best v. Leonardo neutral
ny · 1993
1 sentence

1997Inasmuch as a second disciplinary hearing has been held, petitioner’s appeal from Supreme Court’s judgment dismissing his application for review of the outcome of the first hearing is moot (see, Matter of Best v Leonardo, 194 AD2d 1018 , appeal dismissed 82 NY2d 799 ).

11997–1997
Best v. Leonardo neutral
nyappdiv · 1993
1 sentence

1997Inasmuch as a second disciplinary hearing has been held, petitioner’s appeal from Supreme Court’s judgment dismissing his application for review of the outcome of the first hearing is moot (see, Matter of Best v Leonardo, 194 AD2d 1018 , appeal dismissed 82 NY2d 799 ).

11997–1997
Wolff v. McDonnell green
scotus · 1974
1 sentence

1976A fortiori, after petitioner’s voluntary admission of the charges, a claim that she did not receive timely formal notice of the first disciplinary hearing, as required by Wolff v McDonnell ( 418 US 539, 564 ), even if true, is irrelevant.

11976–1976

Where else courts name it

NY 6 (1976–2021) DC 3 (1987–1995) WA 2 (2010–2010)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check