MATTER OF JONES v. McCoy

342 N.E.2d 602, 37 N.Y.2d 932, 379 N.Y.S.2d 841, 1975 N.Y. LEXIS 2294
New York Court of Appeals·Decided November 19, 1975·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Memorandum. Before an employee of the unified court system may seek judicial relief, he must exhaust whatever administrative remedies have been made available to him (Matter of Kalichstein v McCoy, 23 NY2d 978, 980). Since petitioner had not exhausted his available remedy under 22 NYCRR 25.5, the court below properly dismissed this article 78 proceeding in the nature of mandamus. Moreover, the extraordinary remedy is available only when there is a clear legal right and is still subject to the exercise of discretion by the courts below, which this court might or might not have the power to review.

*934 Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur; Chief Judge Breitel taking no part.

Order affirmed, without costs, in a memorandum.

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

MATTER OF JONES v. McCoy, 342 N.E.2d 602, 37 N.Y.2d 932, 379 N.Y.S.2d 841, 1975 N.Y. LEXIS 2294 (N.Y. 1975).

342 N.E.2d 602 (MATTER OF JONES v. McCoy) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

New York Life Insurance v. Agee
807 F. Supp. 53 (E.D. Michigan, 1992)
Abreu v. New York City Police Department
182 A.D.2d 414 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
Pavone v. Barclay
110 A.D.2d 758 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1985)
Turner v. Reed
52 A.D.2d 739 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1976)