From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mital v. Consul-General

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 21, 1996
233 A.D.2d 226 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

November 21, 1996.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (David Saxe, J.), entered April 4, 1995, which denied petitioner's application pursuant to CPLR article 78 to compel respondent to confirm and authenticate an affidavit of petitioner for use in India, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Before: Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Kupferman, Williams and Andrias, JJ.


The act petitioner would have respondent perform — confirming and authenticating an affidavit pursuant to the Diplomatic and Consular Office (Oath and Fees) Act of 1948 (India)"is obviously an "exercise of consular functions", and, as such, under article 43 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, cannot be compelled by "the judicial or administrative authorities of the receiving state" (21 UST 77, 104, TIAS 6820 [1970]). Accordingly, the proceeding was properly dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.


Summaries of

Mital v. Consul-General

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 21, 1996
233 A.D.2d 226 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Mital v. Consul-General

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of RAM KISHAN MITAL, Appellant, v. CONSUL-GENERAL, CONSULATE…

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

Date published: Nov 21, 1996

Citations

233 A.D.2d 226 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
650 N.Y.S.2d 116