Coleman v. Goldberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Coleman v. Goldberg

31 A.D.3d 757, 818 N.Y.S.2d 466

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

DecidedJuly 25, 2006

StatusPublished

This text of 31 A.D.3d 757 (Coleman v. Goldberg) 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

Coleman v. Goldberg, 31 A.D.3d 757, 818 N.Y.S.2d 466 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of prohibition, inter alia, in effect, to prohibit the respondent Joel M. Goldberg, a Justice of the Supreme Court, Kings County, from proceeding with a criminal action entitled People v Coleman, pending under Kings County Indictment Nos. 5189/03 and 2083/05, and application for poor person relief.

Ordered that the application for poor person relief is granted to the extent that the filing fee imposed by CPLR 8022 (b) is waived, and the application is otherwise denied; and it is further,

Adjudged that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed, 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 [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. Schmidt, J.P., Mastro, Dillon and Covello, 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, in effect, to prohibit the respondent Joel M. Goldberg, a Justice of the Supreme Court, Kings County, from proceeding with a criminal action entitled People v Coleman, pending under Kings County Indictment Nos. 5189/03 and 2083/05, and application for poor person relief.

Ordered that the application for poor person relief is granted to the extent that the filing fee imposed by CPLR 8022 (b) is waived, and the application is otherwise denied; and it is further,

Adjudged that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed, 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 [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. Schmidt, J.P., Mastro, Dillon and Covello, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 A.D.3d 757, 818 N.Y.S.2d 466, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coleman-v-goldberg-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack