Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging various parole decisions rendered between 1991 and 2003. He named Supreme Court as the sole respondent. Prior to service of an answer, respondent moved to dismiss the petition on the ground, among others, that petitioner failed to name the Division of Parole as a necessary party to the proceeding. The petition was dismissed on this basis, resulting in this appeal.
We affirm. We note that the Division...
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.