Peirez v. Caso
This text of 72 A.D.2d 797 (Peirez v. Caso) 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.
Opinion
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to compel the respondent Nassau County officers "to call in and/or establish a schedule for the retirement” of a debt due, petitioners appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered April 12, 1979, which, inter alia, dismissed the petition. Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements. An article 78 proceeding in the nature of mandamus does not lie unless the act sought to be compelled is ministerial, nondiscretionary and nonjudgmental, and is premised upon specific statutory authority mandating performance in a specified manner (see Matter of Stutzman v Fahey, 62 AD2d 1070; Matter of Posner v Levitt, 37 AD2d 331). The act here sought to be compelled— collection of a debt due from respondent Nassau County Bridge Authority to respondent Nassau County in connection with the construction of the Atlantic Beach Bridge—does not meet the above criteria. Titone, J. P., O’Connor, Gulotta and Margett, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
72 A.D.2d 797, 421 N.Y.S.2d 627, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14050, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/peirez-v-caso-nyappdiv-1979.