Claimant seeks damages for his alleged "illegal incarceration" when the Division of Parole improperly classified him as a "category 2" violator and revoked his parole. Determinations pertaining to parole and its revocation, however, are deemed strictly sovereign and quasi-judicial in nature and, accordingly, the State, in making such determinations, is absolutely immune from tort liability (Lublin v. State of New York, 135 Misc.2d 419, 420, affd 135 A.D.2d 1155, lv denied 71 N.Y.2d 802). Since claimant seeks damages attributable to the State's decision to revoke his parole, his claim is barred (Tarter v. State of New York, 68 N.Y.2d 511). This conclusion is not altered by the circumstance that the decision of the Parole Board revoking claimant's parole was eventually determined to have been in error, since the action of the Parole Board was not thereby deprived of its quasi-judicial character (id. at 51 7-518).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.