Matter of Roesch v Fischer

Annotate this Case
Matter of Roesch v Fischer 2013 NY Slip Op 01882 Decided on March 21, 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: March 21, 2013
514161

[*1]In the Matter of JOSEPH ROESCH, Appellant,

v

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

Calendar Date: January 24, 2013
Before: Peters, P.J., Lahtinen, Spain and McCarthy, JJ.


Joseph Roesch, Dannemora, appellant pro se.
Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany
(Frank K. Walsh of counsel), for respondents.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Cerio Jr., J.), entered February 10, 2012 in Chemung County, which dismissed petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to obtain a copy of his Sex Offender Counseling and Treatment Program clinical file.

Petitioner, an inmate, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking, among other things, to obtain a copy of the clinical record pertaining to his participation in a Sex Offender Counseling and Treatment Program. Supreme Court concluded that, inasmuch as petitioner was provided access to his clinical file, the proceeding was moot and it dismissed the petition. On appeal, petitioner continues to challenge the failure to provide him with a copy of the clinical file. The Attorney General has advised this Court that a copy of the clinical file has since been provided to petitioner. In view of this, the appeal is now moot (see Matter of Humane Socy. of U.S. v Fanslau, 54 AD3d 537, 539 [2008]; Matter of Kiesel v Goord, 21 AD3d 1189, 1190 [2005]). Therefore, it must be dismissed.

Peters, P.J., Lahtinen, Spain and McCarthy, 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.