O'Connor v. Modica

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

O'Connor v. Modica

33 A.D.3d 1007, 822 N.Y.S.2d 713

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 31, 2006·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of mandamus, inter alia, to compel the respondent Deborah Stevens Módica, a Justice of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, Queens County, to vacate an order of that court dated May 15, 2006, in an action entitled People v O’Connor, pending under docket No. 6Q005976, 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, 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 [1981]). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought. Crane, J.E, Krausman, Spolzino and Skelos, 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 mandamus, inter alia, to compel the respondent Deborah Stevens Módica, a Justice of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, Queens County, to vacate an order of that court dated May 15, 2006, in an action entitled People v O’Connor, pending under docket No. 6Q005976, 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, 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 [1981]). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought. Crane, J.E, Krausman, Spolzino and Skelos, JJ., concur.

O'Connor v. Modica, 33 A.D.3d 1007, 822 N.Y.S.2d 713 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

33 A.D.3d 1007 (O'Connor v. Modica) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related