Reape v. Civil Court

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Reape v. Civil Court

209 A.D.2d 418, 619 N.Y.S.2d 600, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10943

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

DecidedNovember 7, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 209 A.D.2d 418 (Reape v. Civil Court) 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

Reape v. Civil Court, 209 A.D.2d 418, 619 N.Y.S.2d 600, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10943 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to compel Civil Court Judge Arthur R. Scott, Jr. to reverse his order dated December 14, 1992, which denied the petitioner’s motion for summary judgment in the underlying landlord-tenant holdover proceeding, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Golden, J.), dated May 19, 1993, which dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Supreme Court properly dismissed the petitioner’s CPLR article 78 proceeding. The relief sought by the petitioner in the nature of mandamus and prohibition was not available under these circumstances (see, Matter of Legal Aid Socy. v Scheinman, 53 NY2d 12, 16; Matter of Doe v Axelrod, 71 NY2d 484, 490).

We have reviewed the claims advanced by the petitioner in his pro se brief and conclude that they are without merit. Thompson, J. P., Miller, O’Brien, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.

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

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to compel Civil Court Judge Arthur R. Scott, Jr. to reverse his order dated December 14, 1992, which denied the petitioner’s motion for summary judgment in the underlying landlord-tenant holdover proceeding, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Golden, J.), dated May 19, 1993, which dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Supreme Court properly dismissed the petitioner’s CPLR article 78 proceeding. The relief sought by the petitioner in the nature of mandamus and prohibition was not available under these circumstances (see, Matter of Legal Aid Socy. v Scheinman, 53 NY2d 12, 16; Matter of Doe v Axelrod, 71 NY2d 484, 490).

We have reviewed the claims advanced by the petitioner in his pro se brief and conclude that they are without merit. Thompson, J. P., Miller, O’Brien, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

209 A.D.2d 418, 619 N.Y.S.2d 600, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10943, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reape-v-civil-court-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack