Cole v. DeRosa

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cole v. DeRosa

113 A.D.3d 765, 978 N.Y.2d 872

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 22, 2014·Published

Opinion

[766]*766The 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. Rivera, J.P., Dillon, Dickerson and Austin, JJ., concur.

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

[766]*766The 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. Rivera, J.P., Dillon, Dickerson and Austin, JJ., concur.

Cole v. DeRosa, 113 A.D.3d 765, 978 N.Y.2d 872 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

113 A.D.3d 765 (Cole v. DeRosa) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related