Caldwell v. Ambrosio

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Caldwell v. Ambrosio

287 A.D.2d 562, 731 N.Y.S.2d 671, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9558

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

DecidedOctober 15, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 287 A.D.2d 562 (Caldwell v. Ambrosio) 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

Caldwell v. Ambrosio, 287 A.D.2d 562, 731 N.Y.S.2d 671, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9558 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, in the nature of mandamus, in effect, to compel the respondent to vacate an order denying the petitioner’s motion to dismiss a criminal action pending against him under Kings County Indictment No. 1114/2001, and application for poor person relief.

Ordered that the application for poor person relief is granted; and it is further,

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

The extraordinary remedy of mandamus will lie only to compel the performance of a ministerial act, and only when there exists a clear legal right to the relief sought (see, Matter of Legal Aid Socy. v Scheinman, 53 NY2d 12, 16). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought. Altman, J. P., Goldstein, McGinity and Cozier, 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, in effect, to compel the respondent to vacate an order denying the petitioner’s motion to dismiss a criminal action pending against him under Kings County Indictment No. 1114/2001, and application for poor person relief.

Ordered that the application for poor person relief is granted; and it is further,

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

The extraordinary remedy of mandamus will lie only to compel the performance of a ministerial act, and only when there exists a clear legal right to the relief sought (see, Matter of Legal Aid Socy. v Scheinman, 53 NY2d 12, 16). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought. Altman, J. P., Goldstein, McGinity and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

287 A.D.2d 562, 731 N.Y.S.2d 671, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9558, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/caldwell-v-ambrosio-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack