inner_thought Expert legal document formatter. Clean, semantic HTML. PDF screenshots and OCR. Preserve all content exactly, straight quotes, no code fences, specific tags for cases (``), laws (``), pagination (``), and footnotes (``, ``). * Page 991: Contains the end of one matter (Dillon, J.P., Hall, Austin and Barros, JJ., concur.) and the start of a new one: "In the Matter of In Defense of Animals et al...". * Target Case: *In the Matter of In Defense of Animals et al. v Vassar College et al.* * Court: Appellate Division, Second Department (inferred from "AD3d" citations and the context of NY reporter page 991). * Date: Decided around 2014 (based on citations like 118 AD3d 897 [2014]). Looking closer at the OCR/text, the Supreme Court decision was 2012. Usually, these volumes are organized. The NYS2d citation is [994 NYS2d 412]. * Parties: Appellants (In Defense of Animals, Marcy Schwartz) v. Respondents (Vassar College, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation). * *Case Name*: In the Matter of In Defense of Animals et al., Appellants, et al., Petitioner, v Vassar College et al., Respondents. * *Short Name*: In Defense of Animals v. Vassar Coll. * *Citation*: 994 NYS2d 412 (likely a parallel citation provided in brackets). Note: The page number in the header is 991. The reporter is likely NYS2d or AD3d. The text shows "[994 NYS2d 412]". * *Docket*: Not explicitly listed in a standard "No. 1234" format on the page, but usually these cases have one. I will omit if not found. * *Court*: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Second Department. * *Judge*: Brands, J. (at Supreme Court); Balkin, J.P., Leventhal, Chambers and Hinds-Radix, JJ. (concurring). * *Page 991*: Starts mid-page. * "In the Matter of In Defense of Animals..." * Citation: [994 NYS2d 412] * Background info: Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78... * Order: "Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, with one bill of costs." * Opinion start: "The petitioners commenced this proceeding..." * *Page 992*: * Continues opinion. "required to obtain a permit...". * Mentions SEQRA, EIS, DEC. * Procedural history. * Mootness discussion: *Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne*, *Saratoga County Chamber of Commerce v Pataki*, *City of New York v Maul*. * *Page 993*: * Mootness exception analysis. * SEQRA standard: *Matter of Jackson v New York State Urban Dev. Corp.*, *Aldrich v Pattison*, *Matter of Riverkeeper, Inc. v Planning Bd. of Town of Southeast*. * Deference to agency: *Matter of Peckham v Calogero*, *Matter of Visiting Nurse Serv. of N.Y. Home Care v New York State Dept. of Health*, *Seenaraine v Securitas Sec. Servs. USA, Inc.* * *Page 994*: * Finalizing SEQRA analysis. * Citations: *Matter of Eadie v Town Bd. of Town of N. Greenbush*. * Conclusion: Supreme Court properly denied petition. * Signatures: Balkin, J.P., Leventhal, Chambers and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur. * Next case starts: *In the Matter of Mohammed J.* (Skip as per "Multi-Opinion Documents" rule). * *SEQRA*: State Environmental Quality Review Act (ECL art 8 [hereinafter SEQRA]) * *CPLR art 78*: CPLR article 78 * *ECL 11-0521*: Environmental Conservation Law § 11-0521 * *6 NYCRR*: 6 NYCRR 617.10 [a] [3] * *Hearst Corp. v Clyne*: Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707, 714 [1980] * *Saratoga*: Saratoga County Chamber of Commerce v Pataki, 100 NY2d 801, 810-811 [2003] * *City of New York v Maul*: City of New York v Maul, 14 NY3d 499, 507 [2010] * "ap- peal" -> "appeal" * "Environmen- tal" -> "Environmental" * "ge- neric" -> "generic" * "con- nection" -> "connection" * The document starts with the end of another case. I must skip that and start with "In the Matter of In Defense of Animals". * Page numbers: 991, 992, 993, 994. * Short name: `In Defense of Animals v. Vassar Coll.` * Court: Appellate Division, Second Department. Since it's NY, I'll use `N.Y. App. Div.` * Date: 2014 (approx based on citations). Wait, I need to check the date. The Supreme Court was Dec 21, 2012. The cite `118 AD3d 897 [2014]` is in the text of the opinion. This means this case is likely from 2014. * Citation: 994 NYS2d 412. * "In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78..." - This is the intro/syllabus. * "Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed..." - This is the court's order. * The main opinion text follows. * No footnotes found in the text. * "Environmental Conservation Law § 11-0521" * "CPLR article 78" * "6 NYCRR 617.10 [a] [3]" * "6 NYCRR 617.15 [a] [1]" * *Matter of Jackson v New York State Urban Dev. Corp.*, 67 NY2d 400. * *Aldrich v Pattison*, 107 AD2d 258. * *Matter of Riverkeeper, Inc. v Planning Bd. of Town of Southeast*, 9 NY3d 219. * Start at Page 991 where the case header begins. * "In the Matter of In Defense of Animals et al., Appellants, et al., Petitioner, v Vassar College et al., Respondents." * Include "[994 NYS2d 412]". * Body starts with "In a proceeding..." * Order. * Opinion text starts "The petitioners commenced this proceeding..." *Refining Page 992*: OCR has some errors like "the to" in "Department of Environmental Conservation (hereinafter DEC) the to conduct". Looking at the screenshot, it says "Department of Environmental Conservation (hereinafter the DEC) to conduct". Correcting to match the image exactly. "the to" is clearly an OCR mistake for "the DEC) to". Wait, looking at the image on page 992: "to obtain a permit from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (hereinafter the DEC) to conduct the deer cull". OCR says "hereinafter DEC) the to conduct". I will follow the image's text. *Refining Page 993*: "affd" is placed weirdly in OCR. Image says: "[1990], affd 77 NY2d 983 [1991])". *Refining Page 994*: Ends after "accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the amended petition and dismissed the proceeding. In light of our determination, we need not reach the appellants' remaining contentions. Balkin, J.P., Leventhal, Chambers and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur." *Check Cite for In Defense of Animals*: The reporter page is 991. The bracketed cite is [994 NYS2d 412]. *Check Judge*: The Supreme Court judge was Brands, J. The Appellate judges are Balkin, J.P., Leventhal, Chambers and Hinds-Radix, JJ. *Wait, the first page has a header*: "991". I'll use that for ``. *Short Name*: In Defense of Animals v. Vassar Coll. *Law Cites*: CPLR article 78 -> `N.Y. C.P.L.R. art. 78` Environmental Conservation Law § 11-0521 -> `N.Y. Envtl. Conserv. Law § 11-0521` ECL art 8 -> `N.Y. Envtl. Conserv. Law art. 8` 6 NYCRR 617.10 -> `6 N.Y.C.R.R. § 617.10` 6 NYCRR 617.15 -> `6 N.Y.C.R.R. § 617.15` *Case Cites*: Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707 [1980] Saratoga County Chamber of Commerce v Pataki, 100 NY2d 801 [2003] City of New York v Maul, 14 NY3d 499 [2010] Matter of Walsh-Tozer v Luis G., 118 AD3d 897 [2014] Matter of Village of Hudson Falls v New York State Dept. of Envtl. Conservation, 158 AD2d 24 [1990], affd 77 NY2d 983 [1991] Matter of Jackson v New York State Urban Dev. Corp., 67 NY2d 400 [1986] Aldrich v Pattison, 107 AD2d 258 [1985] Matter of Riverkeeper, Inc. v Planning Bd. of Town of Southeast, 9 NY3d 219 [2007] Matter of Peckham v Calogero, 12 NY3d 424 [2009] Matter of Visiting Nurse Serv. of N.Y. Home Care v New York State Dept. of Health, 5 NY3d 499 [2005] Seenaraine v Securitas Sec. Servs. USA, Inc., 37 AD3d 700 [2007] Matter of Eadie v Town Bd. of Town of N. Greenbush, 7 NY3d 306 [2006] *Note on the bracketed NYS cite*: [994 NYS2d 412]. The page is 991 in the original volume (likely AD3d). I will list 994 NYS2d 412 as the citation. *Court*: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department. Bluebook: `N.Y. App. Div.` *Dates*: 2014 (based on the cited 118 AD3d 897 case). *Party cleanup*: "In the Matter of In Defense of Animals et al., Appellants, et al., Petitioner, v Vassar College et al., Respondents." One detail: The document shows "JJ., concur." on page 991 at the top. This belongs to the *previous* case. I must skip everything before the "In the Matter of In Defense of Animals" header. Let's re-verify page 992 image text vs OCR: OCR: "hereinafter DEC) the to conduct" Image: "hereinafter the DEC) to conduct" I will use the image text. Let's re-verify page 994 image text: "Balkin, J.P., Leventhal, Chambers and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur." This is the signature block. Let's check for CPLR 78 cite jurisdiction: NY. Let's check for ECL cite jurisdiction: NY. Page break markers: - Page 991 starts at the case caption. - Page 992 starts "required to obtain..." - Page 993 starts "Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne..." - Page 994 starts "NYCRR 617.15 [a] [1])..." Wait, on page 991, the text "Ordered that the motion is denied... concur." belongs to the *previous* motion in a different case ( Albanese, Scarsdale, etc.). The case I am converting starts with the black box line: "In the Matter of In Defense of Animals..." So: 1. Case Info 2. midpage-ps 991 3. Introductory proceeding description. 4. Order. 5. Opinion body. The "Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed" comes *before* the opinion starts. In NY reports, there is often an introductory summary and the court's order, followed by the "Opinion" or "Memorandum" text. Let's verify the transition on Page 992: "...denied the request for a temporary restraining order." Next paragraph starts: "In its answer to the amended complaint..." Page 993: "...rendered otherwise nonreviewable (see City of New York v Maul, 14 NY3d 499, 507 [2010];" Next page starts: "Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne..." Page 994: "...former 6" Next page starts: "NYCRR 617.15 [a] [1])..." I will use `cite="994 NYS2d 412"` as requested by the brackets in text, though the page number is 991. Standard practice is to use the reporter cite if available. One correction in OCR on Page 992: "seeCity of New Yorkv Maul" -> "see City of New York v Maul". I will fix spacing errors. Re-check: "see Saratoga" -> "see Saratoga". OCR missed space. Case info extraction: Name: In the Matter of In Defense of Animals et al., Appellants, et al., Petitioner, v Vassar College et al., Respondents. Short: In Defense of Animals v. Vassar Coll. Cite: 994 NYS2d 412 Court: N.Y. App. Div. (Second Department) Date: 2014 (The case 118 AD3d 897 was decided in June 2014, so this case is likely late 2014). Judge: Brands, J. (trial court). The appellate panel is Balkin, J.P., Leventhal, Chambers, and Hinds-Radix, JJ. Ready.