Lawrence v. Supreme Court
This text of 24 A.D.2d 849 (Lawrence v. Supreme Court) 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.
Opinion
Petition brought under article 78 CPLR in the nature of a writ of prohibition, unanimously dismissed, without costs. Prohibition does not lie to correct alleged error or to prevent prospective error where the court has jurisdiction of the subject matter before it. The extraordinary remedy sought may not be employed where such error, if any, “ may be remedied by way of appeal, and where no extreme necessity is shown.” (Matter of Hodes v. Helman, 19 A D 2d 603, 604.) There is, therefore, no basis upon which to grant petitioner the relief he seeks. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Yalente, Stevens and Steuer, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
24 A.D.2d 849, 264 N.Y.S.2d 501, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2994, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lawrence-v-supreme-court-nyappdiv-1965.