From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Green v. Sammarco

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 31, 2006
33 A.D.3d 1000 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Opinion

No. 2006-05924.

October 31, 2006.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of mandamus, inter alia, to compel the respondent Valentino T. Sammarco, an Acting Judge of the County Court, Dutchess County, to vacate an order of that court dated August 10, 2005, in an action entitled People v Green pending under indictment No. 92-00075, and application by the petitioner for poor person relief.

Before: Miller, J.P., Krausman, Spolzino and Lifson, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the application for poor person relief is granted to the extent that the filing fee imposed by CPLR 8022 (b) is waived, and the application is otherwise denied; and it is further,

Adjudged that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

The extraordinary remedy of mandamus will lie only to compel the performance of a ministerial act and only when there exists a clear legal right to the relief sought ( see Matter of Legal Aid Socy. of Sullivan County v Scheinman, 53 NY2d 12, 16). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought.


Summaries of

Green v. Sammarco

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 31, 2006
33 A.D.3d 1000 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
Case details for

Green v. Sammarco

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of NADENE GREEN, Petitioner, v. VALENTINO T. SAMMARCO, as…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Oct 31, 2006

Citations

33 A.D.3d 1000 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 7878
822 N.Y.S.2d 737

Citing Cases

Benevolent Assoc. v. Haverstraw

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs. The "extraordinary remedy of mandamus will lie only to…