Jenkins v. Greenberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Jenkins v. Greenberg

215 A.D.2d 559, 627 N.Y.S.2d 934, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5069

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

DecidedMay 15, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 215 A.D.2d 559 (Jenkins v. Greenberg) 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

Jenkins v. Greenberg, 215 A.D.2d 559, 627 N.Y.S.2d 934, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5069 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of mandamus, inter alia, to compel the respondent Sheldon Greenberg to hold a hearing in connection with the petitioner’s motion pursuant to CPL article 440 to vacate a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered February 20, 1990.

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 here has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought. Bracken, J. P., Rosenblatt, Pizzuto and Krausman, 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 Sheldon Greenberg to hold a hearing in connection with the petitioner’s motion pursuant to CPL article 440 to vacate a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered February 20, 1990.

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 here has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought. Bracken, J. P., Rosenblatt, Pizzuto and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

215 A.D.2d 559, 627 N.Y.S.2d 934, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5069, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jenkins-v-greenberg-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack