Barbara Coleman, by Her Attorney-in-Fact, Mazilee Coleman

Summary

The New York Court of Appeals affirmed the Appellate Division, holding that the appeal is not moot because the likely‑to‑recur exception applies, that the plaintiff’s nominal‑damages §1983 claim survives the mootness challenge, and that the failure‑to‑exhaust administrative remedies argument fails. Justice Pigott dissented, arguing that the amendment to Social Services Law §133 defeats any likelihood of recurrence and the appeal should be dismissed as moot.