Opinion
9855 Index 100890/15
07-11-2019
In re Aubrey VICTOR, etc., Petitioner–Appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY OFFICE OF TRIALS AND HEARINGS, et al., Respondents–Respondents. New York Times Company, Intervenor–Respondent–Respondent.
Koehler & Isaacs LLP, New York (Liam L. Castro of counsel), for appellant. Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (John Moore of counsel), for City respondents. Al–Amyn Sumar, New York, for The New York Times Company, respondent.
Koehler & Isaacs LLP, New York (Liam L. Castro of counsel), for appellant.
Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (John Moore of counsel), for City respondents.
Al–Amyn Sumar, New York, for The New York Times Company, respondent.
Friedman, J.P., Richter, Tom, Oing, Moulton, JJ.
Appeal from order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Shlomo S. Hagler, J.), entered June 4, 2018, denying the petition to annul a decision of respondent New York City Office of Trials and Hearings (OATH), dated February 3, 2015, which denied petitioner's request that OATH redact his name and other personal information from any document it disclosed to the public and to direct the municipal respondents to keep confidential the OATH reports of petitioner and all others similarly situated, and dismissing the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as moot.
Petitioner's claim that the report and recommendations issued by OATH is confidential under Civil Rights Law § 50–a is moot. For several years, the report has been publicly available from multiple sources, including the OATH and LEXIS websites. Because we cannot afford petitioner any meaningful relief, we dismiss the appeal as moot (see Matter of Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. v. New York State Dept. of Envtl. Conservation, 169 A.D.2d 943, 944, 564 N.Y.S.2d 839 [3d Dept. 1991] ).