Matter of Smith v. Knipel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Smith v. Knipel

2017 NY Slip Op 5227, 151 A.D.3d 1067, 54 N.Y.S.3d 599, 2017 WL 2800546

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

DecidedJune 28, 2017

Docket2017-03692

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 5227 (Matter of Smith v. Knipel) 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 Smith v. Knipel, 2017 NY Slip Op 5227, 151 A.D.3d 1067, 54 N.Y.S.3d 599, 2017 WL 2800546 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of prohibition, inter alia, to prohibit the respondent Lawrence Knipel, a Justice of the Supreme Court, Kings County, from enforcing an order dated March 27, 2017, in a proceeding entitled Matter of J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., v Willnus, pending in the Supreme Court, Kings County, under index No. 27940/08. Motion by the respondent Lawrence Knipel to dismiss the petition on the ground, among others, that it is without merit, and separate motion by the respondent JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., to dismiss the petition on the ground, inter alia, that it is without merit, and for the imposition of sanctions.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motions and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is

Ordered that the motions are denied; and it is further,

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 petitioners have failed to establish a clear legal right to the relief sought.

Balkin, J.R, Sgroi, Cohen and Duffy, 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 Lawrence Knipel, a Justice of the Supreme Court, Kings County, from enforcing an order dated March 27, 2017, in a proceeding entitled Matter of J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., v Willnus, pending in the Supreme Court, Kings County, under index No. 27940/08. Motion by the respondent Lawrence Knipel to dismiss the petition on the ground, among others, that it is without merit, and separate motion by the respondent JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., to dismiss the petition on the ground, inter alia, that it is without merit, and for the imposition of sanctions.