From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Graham v. Firetog

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Apr 5, 2017
149 A.D.3d 735 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)

Opinion

04-05-2017

In the Matter of Daryl GRAHAM, petitioner, v. Neil Jon FIRETOG, etc., et al., respondents.

Andrea G. Hirsch, New York, NY, for petitioner. Eric Gonzalez, Acting District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove and Amy Appelbaum of counsel), respondent pro se.


Andrea G. Hirsch, New York, NY, for petitioner.

Eric Gonzalez, Acting District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove and Amy Appelbaum of counsel), respondent pro se.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, in the nature of prohibition to prohibit the respondents from continuing the prosecution of the petitioner in a criminal action entitled People v. Graham, pending in the Supreme Court, Kings County, under Indictment No. 9216/95, and in the nature of mandamus, in effect, to compel the respondent Neil Jon Firetog, a Justice of the Supreme Court, Kings County, to dismiss the indictment.

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

"Because of its extraordinary nature, prohibition is available only where there is a clear legal right, and then only when a court—in cases where judicial authority is challenged—acts or threatens to act either without jurisdiction or in excess of its authorized powers" (Matter of Holtzman v. Goldman, 71 N.Y.2d 564, 569, 528 N.Y.S.2d 21, 523 N.E.2d 297 ; see Matter of Rush v. Mordue, 68 N.Y.2d 348, 352, 509 N.Y.S.2d 493, 502 N.E.2d 170 ). 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 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 prohibition or mandamus (see Matter of Crain Communications v. Hughes, 74 N.Y.2d 626, 541 N.Y.S.2d 971, 539 N.E.2d 1099 ), and has failed to establish entitlement to any other relief requested.

BALKIN, J.P., AUSTIN, LaSALLE and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Graham v. Firetog

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Apr 5, 2017
149 A.D.3d 735 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
Case details for

Graham v. Firetog

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Daryl GRAHAM, petitioner, v. Neil Jon FIRETOG, etc., et…

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

Date published: Apr 5, 2017

Citations

149 A.D.3d 735 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
149 A.D.3d 735

Citing Cases

Rodgers-Feimster v. Feimster

The father appeals.The father's contentions that the Support Magistrate erred in the calculation of the…

Franklin v. Franklin

The court determined, inter alia, that both parents have a strong bond with the children, that both parents'…