Legal Opinion
Dorst v. Pataki
New York Court of Appeals
Decided November 20, 1997PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Levine, J.
Plaintiffs-appellants are two female inmates sentenced to a State correctional facility upon violent felony convictions. At present, both are ineligible for participation in any temporary release program solely as a result of Governor Pataki’s Executive Order No. 5.1 (9 NYCRR 5.5), issued pursuant to a 1995 amendment to Correction Law § 851 (2) (see, L 1995, ch 3, § 29). The amendment provided that: "The governor, by executive order, may exclude or limit the participation of any class of otherwise eligible inmates from participation in a temporary release…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Loving v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Touby v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Levine v. WhalenNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
- Chemical Specialties Manufacturers Ass'n v. JorlingNew York Court of Appeals · 1995
- Nys Law Enforcement Employees v. CuomoNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Rocha v. Bakhter Afghan Halal Kababs, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 2014
- Carpenter Technology Corp. v. Commissioner of Taxation & FinanceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- American Federation of State, County, & Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Council 31 v. StateAppellate Court of Illinois · 2015
- People v. HaneiphCriminal Court of the City of New York · 2002
- Rosenblum v. New York State Workers' Compensation BoardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.