Etwaroo v. Rotker — 254 A.D.2d 484

Majority

p. 484

In the Matter of Sasenarine Etwaroo, Petitioner, v Seymour Rotker, as Justice of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, et al., Respondents.

[679 NYS2d 834]

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of prohibition, inter alia, to prohibit the respondents from proceeding under Indictment No. 1624/97 in the matter entitled People v Etwaroo, and application for poor person relief.

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

p. 485

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 NY2d 564 , 569; see, Matter of Rush v Mordue, 68 NY2d 348 , 352). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought. Mangano, P. J., Miller, Thompson and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cases cited

Holtzman v. Goldman 71 NY2d 564 N.Y. 1988-04-26 at 569 p. 485
Rush v. Mordue 68 NY2d 348 N.Y. 1986-11-18 at 352 p. 485