Opinion · New York Court of Appeals

Solari v. Vincent

38 N.Y.2d 835

Type: Opinion
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Date: 1976-01-08
Topic: international-arbitration

Order reversed, without costs, and petition dismissed on the ground of mootness (cf. Matter of Cummings v Regan, 36 NY2d 969, 971). Concur: Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Wachtler and Fuchsberg. Judge Cooke dissents and votes to affirm in the following memorandum in which Judge Jones concurs.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Solari v. Vincent. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by: 7 opinions

SOLARI v. VINCENT,38 N.Y.2d 835(1976)

HECTOR SOLARI, Respondent, v. LEON J. VINCENT, as Superintendent of Green

Haven Correctional Facility, et al., Appellants.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York.

Argued November 21, 1975

Decided January 8, 1976

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, W. VINCENT GRADY, J.Page 836

Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney-General (Carl SaksandSamuelA. Hirshowitzof counsel), for appellants.Louis A. Tirellifor respondent.

Order reversed, without costs, and petition dismissed on the ground of mootness (cf.Matter of Cummings v Regan,36 N.Y.2d 969,971).

Concur: Chief Judge BREITEL and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, WACHTLER and FUCHSBERG. Judge COOKE dissents and votes to affirm in the following memorandum in which Judge JONES concurs.

COOKE, J. (dissenting).

I respectfully dissent and vote for affirmance. The proceeding should not be dismissed as moot since petitioner remains incarcerated, as distinguished from the situation inMatter ofCummings v Regan(36 N.Y.2d 969), where, at the time of argument before this court, petitioners were either out on parole or released by reason of expiration of sentence. Although section 214 of the Correction Law has been amended (L 1975, ch 131, eff Aug. 2, 1975), so as to include a new subdivision 6, providing for prompt written notification "of the facts and reason or reasons" for denial of parole following a hearing, the disposition made by this court does not provide for a new parole release hearing to which petitioner is entitled.

Order reversed, etc.