Matter of Thompson v. Grossman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Thompson v. Grossman

2019 NY Slip Op 131

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

DecidedJanuary 9, 2019

Docket2018-12396

StatusPublished

This text of 2019 NY Slip Op 131 (Matter of Thompson v. Grossman) 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 Thompson v. Grossman, 2019 NY Slip Op 131 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

Matter of Thompson v Grossman (2019 NY Slip Op 00131)

Matter of Thompson v Grossman

2019 NY Slip Op 00131

Decided on January 9, 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 January 9, 2019 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, J.P.
COLLEEN D. DUFFY
FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY
LINDA CHRISTOPHER, JJ.

2018-12396 DECISION, ORDER & JUDGMENT

[*1]In the Matter of Gregory Thompson, petitioner,

v

Victor Grossman, etc., respondent. Gregory Thompson, Stormville, NY, petitioner pro se.

Letitia James, Attorney General, New York, NY (Alissa S. Wright of counsel), for respondent.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of mandamus to compel the respondent, Victor Grossman, a Justice of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, to determine the petitioner's motion in a proceeding entitled Matter of Thompson v Sanford , pending in that court under Index No. 2586/17, and application by the petitioner for poor person relief.

ORDERED that the application for poor person relief is granted to the extent that the filing fee imposed by CPLR 8022(b) is waived, and the application is otherwise denied; 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 where 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 failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought.

LEVENTHAL, J.P., DUFFY, CONNOLLY and CHRISTOPHER, 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