Matter of Mari v. DeProspo
Opinion
| Matter of Mari v DeProspo |
| 2019 NY Slip Op 06194 |
| Decided on August 21, 2019 |
| 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 August 21, 2019 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, J.P.
COLLEEN D. DUFFY
HECTOR D. LASALLE
ANGELA G. IANNACCI, JJ.
2019-00960 DECISION, ORDER & JUDGMENT
v
William L. DeProspo, etc., respondent. Brian T. Stapleton, White Plains, NY, for petitioner.
Letitia James, Attorney General, New York, NY (Monica Hanna of counsel), for respondent.
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of mandamus, inter alia, to compel the respondent, William L. DeProspo, a Justice of the County Court, Orange County, to grant the petitioner's application for a pistol permit. Motion by the respondent to dismiss the proceeding.
ORDERED that the respondent's motion to dismiss the proceeding is granted; and it is further,
ADJUDGED that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, 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 demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought.
CHAMBERS, J.P., DUFFY, LASALLE and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.
ENTER:Aprilanne Agostino
Clerk of the Court
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
2019 NY Slip Op 6194 (Matter of Mari v. DeProspo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.