| Matter of Jeffries v Steiner |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 05166 [85 AD3d 1431] |
| June 16, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| In the Matter of Hakeem Jeffries, as Parent and Guardian ofJeremiah Jeffries and Another, Infants, et al., Appellants, v David M. Steiner, as Commissionerof Education, et al., Respondents. (And Another RelatedProceeding.) |
—[*1] Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Julie Sheridan of counsel), for David M.Steiner and others, respondents. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York City (Drake A. Colley of counsel), forCity of New York, respondent.
Malone Jr., J. Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Connolly, J.), entered January6, 2011 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioners' application, in a proceeding pursuant toCPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Education findingCathleen Black qualified to receive a school district leader certificate.
In December 2010, petitioners commenced this proceeding seeking to annul a [*2]determination of respondent Commissioner of Education thatCathleen Black was an "exceptionally qualified person[ ]" (Education Law § 3003 [3];see 8 NYCRR 80-3.10 [b] [3]) eligible to receive a superintendent'scertificate—also known as a school district leader certificate—which she needed toserve as Chancellor of the New York City Public Schools (see Education Law §3003 [1]). Supreme Court dismissed the petition and petitioners appeal.
Given that Cathleen Black resigned from her position as Chancellor in April 2011, thisproceeding no longer involves a determination of "the rights of persons which are actuallycontroverted in a particular case pending before [any] tribunal" (Matter of Hearst Corp. vClyne, 50 NY2d 707, 713 [1980]).[FN*]Therefore, this proceeding must be dismissed as moot. Because we are not persuaded that theissue presented in this appeal has a sufficient likelihood of repetition and is a phenomenontypically evading review (see id. at 714-715), we do not agree with petitioners that theexception to the mootness doctrine applies.
Rose, J.P., McCarthy, Garry and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed,as moot, without costs.
Footnote *: This Court may take judicialnotice of matters of public record (see e.g. Matter of Siwek v Mahoney, 39 NY2d 159,163 n 2 [1976]).