Matter of Patouhas v. Colangelo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Patouhas v. Colangelo

2017 NY Slip Op 4446, 151 A.D.3d 729, 53 N.Y.S.3d 552

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

DecidedJune 7, 2017

Docket2017-02817

StatusPublished

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 4446 (Matter of Patouhas v. Colangelo) 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

Matter of Patouhas v. Colangelo, 2017 NY Slip Op 4446, 151 A.D.3d 729, 53 N.Y.S.3d 552 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of prohibition, inter alia, to prohibit the respondent John P. Colangelo, a Justice of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, from presiding over an action entitled Patouhas v Patouhas, pending under Westchester County index No. 52354/16, and from enforcing certain orders issued in that action.

Adjudged that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.

“Because of its extraordinary nature, prohibition is available only where there is a clear legal right, and then only when a court — in cases where judicial authority is challenged — acts or threatens to act either without jurisdiction or in excess of its authorized powers” (Matter of Holtzman v Goldman, 71 NY2d 564, 569 [1988]; see Matter of Rush v Mordue, 68 NY2d 348, 352 [1986]). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear *730 legal right to the relief sought.

Balkin, J.P., Roman, Hinds-Radix and LaSalle, 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 prohibition, inter alia, to prohibit the respondent John P. Colangelo, a Justice of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, from presiding over an action entitled Patouhas v Patouhas, pending under Westchester County index No. 52354/16, and from enforcing certain orders issued in that action.

Adjudged that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.

“Because of its extraordinary nature, prohibition is available only where there is a clear legal right, and then only when a court — in cases where judicial authority is challenged — acts or threatens to act either without jurisdiction or in excess of its authorized powers” (Matter of Holtzman v Goldman, 71 NY2d 564, 569 [1988]; see Matter of Rush v Mordue, 68 NY2d 348, 352 [1986]). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear *730 legal right to the relief sought.

Balkin, J.P., Roman, Hinds-Radix and LaSalle, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2017 NY Slip Op 4446, 151 A.D.3d 729, 53 N.Y.S.3d 552, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-patouhas-v-colangelo-nyappdiv-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack