Williams v. Baily-Schiffman — 122 A.D.3d 933

Majority

p. 933

In the Matter of Tamara Williams et al., Fetitioners, v Loren Baily-Schiffman et al., Respondents.

[995 NYS2d 914]

Froceeding pursuant to CFLR article 78 in the nature of prohibition, inter alia, to prohibit Loren Baily-Schiffman, a Justice of the Supreme Court, Kings County, from enforcing an order dated September 23, 2014, that was issued in a guardianship proceeding pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law article 81, pending in that court under index No. 100147/12.

p. 934

Adjudged that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, 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 [1988]; see Matter of Rush v Mordue, 68 NY2d 348 , 352 [1986]). The petitioners failed to establish a clear legal right to relief in the nature of prohibition.

Skelos, J.E, Dickerson, Chambers and Maltese, JJ., concur.

Cases cited

Holtzman v. Goldman 71 NY2d 564 N.Y. 1988-04-26 at 569 p. 934
Rush v. Mordue 68 NY2d 348 N.Y. 1986-11-18 at 352 p. 934