Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta Legal Aid Society v. Ward 61 N.Y.2d 744

← Cases

Legal Aid Society v. Ward

61 N.Y.2d 744 Court N.Y. Decision date 1984-01-17 English

Contents

Majority

p. 744
Legal Aid Society, Appellant, v Benjamin Ward, as Commissioner of the Department of Correction of the City of New York, Respondent.
p. 745
In the Matter of Naomi Burns et al., Appellants, v Benjamin Ward, as Commissioner of the Department of Correction of the City of New York, et al., Respondents.
Argued December 15, 1983;
decided January 17, 1984
p. 746
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Evan A. Davis and Neil P. Forrest for appellants.
Frederick A. O. Schwarz, Jr., Corporation Counsel (Edward F.X. Hart and Leonard Koerner of counsel), for respondents.
Dan Pochoda for New York City Board of Correction, amicus curiae.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

In each case the order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs, but on grounds other than those relied on by that court.

Although the Board of Correction has authority to make recommendations and submit reports of its findings to the Commissioner of Correction, it has no authority to render an appellate decision binding on the commissioner with respect to his application, in individual cases, of the standards promulgated by the board. Authority to revoke the pass of Thomas McCreary granting access to the correctional facilities in the City of New York lay within the discretion of the commissioner in conformity with the standards promulgated by the board pursuant to subdivision e of section 626 of the New York City Charter, and the reinstatement of his pass cannot be classified as a purely ministerial act. Accordingly, there is no clear legal right to any such reinstatement, and the extraordinary remedy of mandamus to compel does not lie (Matter of Legal Aid Soc.

p. 747
v Scheinman, 53 NY2d 12 ; see Matter of Association of Surrogates & Supreme Ct. Reporters v Bartlett, 40 NY2d 571 ,574; Matter of Gimprich v Board of Educ., 306 NY 401 , 406). It was error for the courts below to have considered the case on the merits.

In the case of Naomi Burns the commissioner has withdrawn his objections and reinstated her institutional pass.

In view of the dispositions we make, petitioners are not entitled to an award of attorney’s fees under section 1988 of title 42 of the United States Code.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Meyer and Simons concur; Judge Kaye taking no part.

Orders affirmed, without costs, in a memorandum.

Cases cited

Statutes and regulations cited