From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Greater N.Y. v. Comm. on Human Rights

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Nov 25, 1970
265 N.E.2d 777 (N.Y. 1970)

Opinion

Argued November 19, 1970

Decided November 25, 1970

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, ALFRED M. ASCIONE, J.

John R. O'Reilly for appellant.

J. Lee Rankin, Corporation Counsel ( Irving Genn, Stanley Buchsbaum and Franklin E. White of counsel), for respondent.


Order affirmed, without costs, in the following memorandum: An article 78 proceeding in the nature of prohibition does not lie in a case such as this. Prohibition is an extraordinary remedy to be invoked only to restrain the exercise of an unauthorized jurisdiction and is not available to prevent possible error which may be corrected on appeal. (See People ex rel. Livingston v. Wyatt, 186 N.Y. 383, 394; Matter of Blake v. Hogan, 25 N.Y.2d 747, 748; Matter of Hogan v. Court of Gen. Sessions, 296 N.Y. 1, 8-9; Matter of Culver Contr. Corp. v. Humphrey, 268 N.Y. 26, 39; Matter of Schuyler v. State Univ. of N.Y. at Albany, 31 A.D.2d 273, 274.)

Concur: Chief Judge FULD and Judges BURKE, SCILEPPI, BERGAN, BREITEL, JASEN and GIBSON.


Summaries of

In re Greater N.Y. v. Comm. on Human Rights

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Nov 25, 1970
265 N.E.2d 777 (N.Y. 1970)
Case details for

In re Greater N.Y. v. Comm. on Human Rights

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of GREATER NEW YORK CORPORATION OF SEVENTH DAY ADVENTISTS…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Nov 25, 1970

Citations

265 N.E.2d 777 (N.Y. 1970)
265 N.E.2d 777
317 N.Y.S.2d 368

Citing Cases

Walston Co. v. Comm. on Human Rights

Thirdly, prohibition is an inappropriate remedy here. "Prohibition is an extraordinary remedy to be invoked…

Village of Camillus v. Diamond

is never issued as a matter of right, but only in a sound discretion when there is no other remedy; it is…