Opinion
December 7, 1992
Adjudged that the petitions are denied and the proceedings are 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; Matter of Crain Communications v Hughes, 74 N.Y.2d 626, 627-628). The petitioner here has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief requested which could not be otherwise safeguarded through alternative remedies (see, Matter of Lipari v Owens, 70 N.Y.2d 731; Matter of Rush v Mordue, 68 N.Y.2d 348, 353). Thus, the proceedings are dismissed. Thompson, J.P., Bracken, Sullivan and Ritter, JJ., concur.