IN RE: Rocco GENEROSO (2024)

DECISION & ORDER

In a hybrid proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 and action, inter alia, for declaratory relief, the petitioners/plaintiffs appeal from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Consuelo Mallafre Melendez, J.), dated February 10, 2022.  The order and judgment, insofar as appealed from, granted that branch of the respondents/defendants’ cross-motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7), and, in effect, CPLR 7804(f) to dismiss the petition/complaint, and, in effect, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding/action.

ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed as academic, with costs to the respondents/defendants.

The petitioners/plaintiffs commenced this hybrid proceeding and action in November 2021, challenging an executive order known as the Key to NYC program, which was issued in response to the public health crisis occasioned by the COVID–19 pandemic.  The Key to NYC program has since expired (see N.Y. City Executive Order [Adams] No. 50, § 2).  As the Key to NYC program has expired, the rights of the parties cannot be affected by the determination of this appeal, and it is therefore academic (see Saratoga County Chamber of Commerce, Inc. v. Pataki, 100 N.Y.2d 801, 811, 766 N.Y.S.2d 654, 798 N.E.2d 1047;  Cornell Univ. v. Bagnardi, 68 N.Y.2d 583, 592, 510 N.Y.S.2d 861, 503 N.E.2d 509;  Matter of Hearst Corp. v. Clyne, 50 N.Y.2d 707, 714, 431 N.Y.S.2d 400, 409 N.E.2d 876).  In addition, the exception to the mootness doctrine does not apply (see Saratoga County Chamber of Commerce v. Pataki, 100 N.Y.2d at 811, 766 N.Y.S.2d 654, 798 N.E.2d 1047;  Matter of Hearst Corp. v. Clyne, 50 N.Y.2d at 714, 431 N.Y.S.2d 400, 409 N.E.2d 876).  Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal as academic.

BRATHWAITE NELSON, J.P., MALTESE, DOWLING and VOUTSINAS, JJ., concur.