Petitioner, a prison inmate, commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge a determination of respondent denying him parole. Supreme Court dismissed the proceeding on the ground of lack of personal jurisdiction. Since petitioner failed to serve respondent and the Attorney General in accordance with the directive set forth in the amended order to show cause, the petition was properly dismissed (see, Matter of Seifert v Selsky,
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.