Baker v. Zambelli

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Baker v. Zambelli

110 A.D.3d 991, 973 N.Y.S.2d 568

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 23, 2013

StatusPublished

This text of 110 A.D.3d 991 (Baker v. Zambelli) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Baker v. Zambelli, 110 A.D.3d 991, 973 N.Y.S.2d 568 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of mandamus, inter alia, to compel the respondent, Barbara G. Zambelli, a Judge of the County Court, Westchester County, to modify the terms of the petitioner’s probation pursuant to CPL 410.20 in an underlying criminal action entitled People v Baker, commenced in the County Court, Westchester County, under indictment No. 09-00670.

Adjudged that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.

The extraordinary remedy of mandamus will lie only to compel the performance of a ministerial act, and only where there exists a clear legal right to the relief sought (see Matter of Legal Aid Socy. of Sullivan County v Scheinman, 53 NY2d 12, 16 [1981]). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought. Angiolillo, J.P., Hall, Austin and Miller, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of mandamus, inter alia, to compel the respondent, Barbara G. Zambelli, a Judge of the County Court, Westchester County, to modify the terms of the petitioner’s probation pursuant to CPL 410.20 in an underlying criminal action entitled People v Baker, commenced in the County Court, Westchester County, under indictment No. 09-00670.

Adjudged that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.

The extraordinary remedy of mandamus will lie only to compel the performance of a ministerial act, and only where there exists a clear legal right to the relief sought (see Matter of Legal Aid Socy. of Sullivan County v Scheinman, 53 NY2d 12, 16 [1981]). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought. Angiolillo, J.P., Hall, Austin and Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

110 A.D.3d 991, 973 N.Y.S.2d 568, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baker-v-zambelli-nyappdiv-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack