-
“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 petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought (see Matter of Brine v Dubinsky, 115 Misc 2d 572, 574 [1982]).
The petitioner’s remaining contentions are without merit.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding. Covello, J.E, Lott, Roman and Miller, JJ., concur.
Document Info
Citation Numbers: 82 A.D.3d 1097, 919 N.Y.2d 354
Filed Date: 3/22/2011
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/19/2024