Matter of Lashway v Fischer

Annotate this Case
Matter of Lashway v Fischer 2013 NY Slip Op 08484 Decided on December 19, 2013 Appellate Division, Third Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided and Entered: December 19, 2013
516063

[*1]In the Matter of STEVEN LASHWAY, Appellant,

v

BRIAN FISCHER, as Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision, et al., Respondents.

Calendar Date: October 22, 2013
Before: Lahtinen, J.P., Stein, McCarthy and Egan Jr., JJ.


Steven Lashway, Pine City, appellant pro se.
Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany
(William E. Storrs of counsel), for respondents.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Breslin, J.), entered January 30, 2013 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner, a prison inmate, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge a tier III disciplinary determination finding him guilty of violent conduct, interference with employees, refusing a direct order and movement violations. Supreme Court dismissed the petition, prompting this appeal. The Attorney General has informed this Court that, during the pendency of this appeal, the determination was administratively reversed and records containing references to the superintendent's hearing were to be expunged. Accordingly, petitioner has received all of the relief to which he is entitled and this appeal has been rendered moot (see Matter of Sowell v Fischer, 108 AD3d 962, 963 [2013], appeal dismissed 22 NY3d 913 [2013], lv denied ___ NY3d ___ [Nov. 19, 2013]; Matter of Townes v Fischer, 98 AD3d 760, 761 [2012]).

Lahtinen, J.P., Stein, McCarthy and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. [*2]

ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.