Lumpkins v. Griffin — 286 A.D.2d 334

Majority

p. 334

In the Matter of Todd Lumpkins, Petitioner, v James Griffin et al., Respondents.

[728 NYS2d 681]

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of prohibition, inter alia, to prohibit the respondents from proceeding in an action entitled People v Lumpkins, pending in the Supreme Court, Queens County, under Indictment No. 1454/2000, and application for leave to prosecute the proceeding as a poor person.

p. 335

Ordered that the application for poor person relief is granted to the extent that the filing fee imposed by CPLR 8022 (b) is waived, and the application is otherwise denied as academic; 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 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. O’Brien, J. P., Krausman, Goldstein, Schmidt and Crane, JJ., concur.

Cases cited

Holtzman v. Goldman 71 NY2d 564 N.Y. 1988-04-26 at 569 p. 335
Rush v. Mordue 68 NY2d 348 N.Y. 1986-11-18 at 352 p. 335