Matter of Jackson v Henley

Annotate this Case
Matter of Jackson v Henley 2019 NY Slip Op 06661 Decided on September 19, 2019 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: September 19, 2019
527646

[*1]In the Matter of Malik Jackson, Petitioner,

v

K. Henley, as Hearing Officer, et al., Respondents.

Calendar Date: August 30, 2019
Before: Garry, P.J., Lynch, Clark, Devine and Rumsey, JJ.

Malik Jackson, Dannemora, petitioner pro se.

Letitia James, Attorney General, Albany (Marcus J. Mastracco of counsel), for respondents.



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 Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging a tier III disciplinary determination that found 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 $5 mandatory surcharge has been refunded to petitioner's inmate account. Inasmuch as petitioner has been granted all the relief to which he is entitled, the petition must be dismissed as moot (see Matter of Ack v Venettozzi, 169 AD3d 1138, 1139 [2019]; Matter of Williams v Keyser, 167 AD3d 1202, 1202 [2019]). As the record reflects that petitioner paid a reduced filing fee of $15 and he has requested reimbursement thereof, we grant petitioner's request for that amount (see Matter of Sockwell v LaClair, 170 AD3d 1416, 1417 [2019]; Matter of Abdul-Halim v Venettozzi, 164 AD3d 1554, 1555 [2018]).

Garry, P.J., Lynch, Clark, Devine and Rumsey, JJ., concur.

ADJUDGED that the petition is dismissed, as moot, without costs, but with disbursements in the amount of $15.



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.