Legal Opinion
Bezio v. Dorsey
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided January 12, 2012PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Spain, J.E
*1052We turn first to the threshold issue of mootness. The order authorizing the force feeding of respondent expired by its own terms on November 23, 2011. Further, after the order was issued, respondent was transferred to another facility and has been voluntarily consuming solid foods. Accordingly, respondent’s contentions on appeal that are specific to this particular proceeding — i.e., his assertion that he should have been granted a continuance and his argument that the record did not support the finding that his life was at risk — are moot and will not be addressed (see Matter of…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Turner v. SafleySupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Pell v. ProcunierSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Hearst Corp. v. ClyneNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- Vacco v. QuillSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Rivers v. KatzNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Bezio v. DorseyNew York Court of Appeals · 2013
- Matter of Racette v. MessaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- Bezio v. DorseyNew York Court of Appeals · 2013
- In re Lucas QQAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
- In re Lucas QQAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016