Matter of Buscarello v. Morgenstern
This text of 195 N.Y.S.3d 547 (Matter of Buscarello v. Morgenstern) 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
| Matter of Buscarello v Morgenstern |
| 2023 NY Slip Op 04767 |
| Decided on September 27, 2023 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. |
Decided on September 27, 2023 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, J.P.
JOSEPH J. MALTESE
HELEN VOUTSINAS
LILLIAN WAN, JJ.
2023-04964 DECISION, ORDER & JUDGMENT
v
Esther Mickey Morgenstern, etc., respondent.
Michael Buscarello, Brooklyn, NY, petitioner pro se.
Letitia James, Attorney General, New York, NY (Miranda R. Onnen of counsel), for respondent.
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, in effect, inter alia, in the nature of mandamus to compel the respondent, Esther Mickey Morgenstern, a Justice of the Supreme Court, Kings County (IDV Part), to vacate all orders issued in an action entitled Buscarello v Buscarello , pending in that court under Index No. 53124/18. Motion by the respondent pursuant to CPLR 3211(a) to dismiss the petition, inter alia, for failure to state a cause of action.
Upon the petition, and the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED that the motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(a) to dismiss the petition is granted; and it is further,
ADJUDGED that 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. of Sullivan County v Scheinman , 53 NY2d 12, 16). The petitioner has failed to state a cause of action for relief in the nature of mandamus.
CONNOLLY, J.P., MALTESE, VOUTSINAS and WAN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:Darrell M. Joseph
Acting Clerk of the Court
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
195 N.Y.S.3d 547, 219 A.D.3d 1519, 2023 NY Slip Op 04767, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-buscarello-v-morgenstern-nyappdiv-2023.