From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Cunningham v. Appelman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 16, 1997
240 A.D.2d 574 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Summary

In Matter of Donovan, 13 Mass. Att'y Discipline Rep. 142, 143-144 (1997), the respondent was suspended for eighteen months for failing to disclose on her bar application that she had been under investigation for student loan fraud for two years, where the form of petition for admission did not require disclosure of the pendency of any investigation into possible criminal charges, and the attorney did not volunteer information about the investigation.

Summary of this case from In the Matter of Moore

Opinion

June 16, 1997


Motion by the respondent Justice of the Supreme Court to dismiss the proceeding.

Upon the petition and papers filed in support of the proceeding, and the papers filed in opposition thereto and in support of the motion, it is

Ordered that the application for poor person relief is granted; and it is further,

Ordered that the motion is granted; and it is further,

Adjudged that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed, 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; see, Matter of Rush v. Mordue, 68 N.Y.2d 348, 352). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought.

Miller, J.P., Copertino, Sullivan and Altman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Cunningham v. Appelman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 16, 1997
240 A.D.2d 574 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

In Matter of Donovan, 13 Mass. Att'y Discipline Rep. 142, 143-144 (1997), the respondent was suspended for eighteen months for failing to disclose on her bar application that she had been under investigation for student loan fraud for two years, where the form of petition for admission did not require disclosure of the pendency of any investigation into possible criminal charges, and the attorney did not volunteer information about the investigation.

Summary of this case from In the Matter of Moore
Case details for

Matter of Cunningham v. Appelman

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of DONOVAN CUNNINGHAM, Petitioner, v. PEARLE APPELMAN, as…

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

Date published: Jun 16, 1997

Citations

240 A.D.2d 574 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
659 N.Y.S.2d 792

Citing Cases

In the Matter of Moore

In Matter of Ruzzo, 10 Mass. Att'y Discipline Rep. 233, 233 (1994), the respondent was suspended for one…