Matter of Chao v Hollingshead

Annotate this Case
Matter of Chao v Hollingshead 2016 NY Slip Op 05699 Decided on July 28, 2016 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: July 28, 2016
522446

[*1]In the Matter of JAMES CHAO, Petitioner,

v

TIMOTHY HOLLINGSHEAD, as Correction Lieutenant at Sullivan Correctional Facility, et al., Respondents.

Calendar Date: June 6, 2016
Before: Peters, P.J., Garry, Lynch, Devine and Aarons, JJ.

James Chao, Fallsburg, petitioner pro se.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Marcus J. Mastracco of counsel), for respondents.



MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT

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

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a prison disciplinary determination. 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. Although petitioner seeks to be restored to the status he enjoyed prior to the disciplinary determination, including reinstatement

to his prison job and back pay, "inmates have no constitutional or statutory right to their prior housing or programming status" (Matter of Hamilton v Bezio, 93 AD3d 1049, 1050 [2012]; see Matter of Folk v Annucci, 122 AD3d 977, 978 [2014]). Given that petitioner has received all of the relief to which he is entitled, the petition must be dismissed as moot (see Matter of Hill v Annucci, 136 AD3d 1081, 1082 [2016]; Matter of Folk v Annucci, 122 AD3d at 978).

Peters, P.J., Garry, Lynch, Devine and Aarons, JJ., concur.

ADJUDGED that the petition 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.