Matter of Shepherd v. Annucci
Cases that cite this one
10 later published cases cite this decision.
- Hilgreen v. Pollard Excavating, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
- Romano v. Kelly (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2026)
- Matter of Vann v. Keyser (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2023)
- Daire v. Sterling Ins. Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
- O'Toole v. Marist Coll. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
- O'Toole v. Marist Coll. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
- Matter of Patterson v. Keyser (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
- Matter of Loccenitt v. Annucci (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2021)
- Matter of Dominguez v. Wendland (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2021)
- Cagino v. Levine (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2021)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
| Matter of Shepherd v Annucci |
| 2021 NY Slip Op 02030 |
| Decided on April 1, 2021 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. |
Decided and Entered: April 1, 2021
530917
v
Anthony J. Annucci, as Acting Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision, Respondent.
Calendar Date: March 5, 2021
Before: Garry, P.J., Clark, Aarons, Reynolds Fitzgerald and Colangelo, JJ.
Eon Shepherd, Stormville, petitioner pro se.
Letitia James, Attorney General, Albany (Kate H. Nepveu of counsel), for respondent.
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 finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.
Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a tier III disciplinary determination finding him guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules. The Attorney General has advised this Court that the determination has been administratively reversed, all references thereto have been expunged from petitioner's institutional record and the mandatory $5 surcharge has been refunded to petitioner's inmate account. As such, petitioner has received all the relief to which he is entitled and the petition must be dismissed as moot (see Matter of Vilella v Annucci, 185 AD3d 1362, 1362 [2020]; Matter of Brown v Annucci, 181 AD3d 1087, 1088 [2020]).
Garry, P.J., Clark, Aarons, Reynolds Fitzgerald and Colangelo, JJ., concur.
ADJUDGED that the petition is dismissed, as moot, without costs.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.