Butti v. Angiolillo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Butti v. Angiolillo

243 A.D.2d 473, 664 N.Y.S.2d 947, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9365

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

DecidedOctober 6, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 243 A.D.2d 473 (Butti v. Angiolillo) 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

Butti v. Angiolillo, 243 A.D.2d 473, 664 N.Y.S.2d 947, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9365 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of prohibition, inter alia, to enjoin the respondent, or any Judge of the County Court, Westchester County, from imposing sentence on the petitioner in an underlying criminal action entitled People v Thomas A. Butti, pending in that court under Indictment No. 92-1772.

Motion by the respondent to dismiss the proceeding.

Upon the petition and papers filed in support of the proceeding, and the papers filed in opposition thereto and in support of the motion, it is

[474]*474Ordered that the motion is granted; and it is further,

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; see, Matter of Rush v Mordue, 68 NY2d 348, 352). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought. Bracken, J. P., Rosenblatt, Copertino and Luciano, 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 prohibition, inter alia, to enjoin the respondent, or any Judge of the County Court, Westchester County, from imposing sentence on the petitioner in an underlying criminal action entitled People v Thomas A. Butti, pending in that court under Indictment No. 92-1772.

Motion by the respondent to dismiss the proceeding.

Upon the petition and papers filed in support of the proceeding, and the papers filed in opposition thereto and in support of the motion, it is

[474]*474Ordered that the motion is granted; and it is further,

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

243 A.D.2d 473, 664 N.Y.S.2d 947, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9365, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/butti-v-angiolillo-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack