From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Deem v. Walsh

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Dec 8, 2021
200 A.D.3d 779 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)

Opinion

2021–04385

12-08-2021

In the Matter of Michael A. DEEM, petitioner, v. Gretchen WALSH, etc., respondent.

Michael A. Deem, Yonkers, NY, petitioner pro se. Letitia James, Attorney General, New York, NY (Elizabeth A. Figueira of counsel), for respondent.


Michael A. Deem, Yonkers, NY, petitioner pro se.

Letitia James, Attorney General, New York, NY (Elizabeth A. Figueira of counsel), for respondent.

HECTOR D. LASALLE, P.J., COLLEEN D. DUFFY, WILLIAM G. FORD, DEBORAH A. DOWLING, JJ.

DECISION & JUDGMENT

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, in effect, in the nature of mandamus to compel the respondent, Gretchen Walsh, a Justice of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, to recuse herself from presiding over an action entitled Deem v. DiMella–Deem, commenced in that court under Index No. 68616/17.

ADJUDGED that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.

The extraordinary remedy of mandamus will lie only to compel the performance of a ministerial act, and only where there exists a clear legal right to the relief sought (see Matter of Legal Aid Socy. of Sullivan County, Inc. v. Scheinman, 53 N.Y.2d 12, 16, 439 N.Y.S.2d 882, 422 N.E.2d 542 ). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought.

The petitioner's remaining contentions are without merit.

LASALLE, P.J., DUFFY, FORD and DOWLING, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Deem v. Walsh

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Dec 8, 2021
200 A.D.3d 779 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)
Case details for

Deem v. Walsh

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Michael A. DEEM, petitioner, v. Gretchen WALSH, etc.…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Dec 8, 2021

Citations

200 A.D.3d 779 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021)
200 A.D.3d 779