Pavlovic v. Czajka

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Pavlovic v. Czajka

27 A.D.3d 983, 810 N.Y.S.2d 687

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

DecidedMarch 23, 2006

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 27 A.D.3d 983 (Pavlovic v. Czajka) 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

Pavlovic v. Czajka, 27 A.D.3d 983, 810 N.Y.S.2d 687 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (initiated in this Court pursuant to CPLR 506 [b] [1]) to review a determination of respondent which revoked petitioner’s pistol permit.

A CPLR article 78 proceeding against a Judge of the Surrogate’s Court should be commenced in Supreme Court and is not properly commenced in this Court (see CPLR 506 [b] [1]; Matter of Panas v Traficanti, 147 AD2d 795, 796 [1989]; Matter of Juracka v Severson, 115 AD2d 102, 102 [1985], lv denied 67 NY2d 603 [1986]). Neither Matter of Mazzone v Czajka (8 AD3d 788 [2004]) nor Matter of Gerard v Czajka (307 AD2d 633 [2003]) address the issue of lack of initial jurisdiction in this Court and, therefore, they should not be regarded as controlling authority.

Crew III, J.P., Peters, Mugglin, Rose and Kane, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the petition is dismissed, without costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (initiated in this Court pursuant to CPLR 506 [b] [1]) to review a determination of respondent which revoked petitioner’s pistol permit.

A CPLR article 78 proceeding against a Judge of the Surrogate’s Court should be commenced in Supreme Court and is not properly commenced in this Court (see CPLR 506 [b] [1]; Matter of Panas v Traficanti, 147 AD2d 795, 796 [1989]; Matter of Juracka v Severson, 115 AD2d 102, 102 [1985], lv denied 67 NY2d 603 [1986]). Neither Matter of Mazzone v Czajka (8 AD3d 788 [2004]) nor Matter of Gerard v Czajka (307 AD2d 633 [2003]) address the issue of lack of initial jurisdiction in this Court and, therefore, they should not be regarded as controlling authority.

Crew III, J.P., Peters, Mugglin, Rose and Kane, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the petition is dismissed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

27 A.D.3d 983, 810 N.Y.S.2d 687, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pavlovic-v-czajka-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack