Veleanu v. Dolan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Veleanu v. Dolan

107 A.D.3d 906, 966 N.Y.S.2d 869

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

DecidedJune 19, 2013

StatusPublished

This text of 107 A.D.3d 906 (Veleanu v. Dolan) 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

Veleanu v. Dolan, 107 A.D.3d 906, 966 N.Y.S.2d 869 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursu[907]*907ant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, in the nature of mandamus to vacate a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, dated September 29, 2010, entered in a proceeding entitled Matter of People of State of New York v Veleanu, under index No. 6326/09. Motion by the respondent Attorney General of the State of New York pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) to dismiss the petition.

Ordered that the motion is denied, without costs or disbursements; 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 [1981]). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought. Eng, P.J., Chambers, Roman and Miller, JJ., concur.

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

Proceeding pursu[907]*907ant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, in the nature of mandamus to vacate a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, dated September 29, 2010, entered in a proceeding entitled Matter of People of State of New York v Veleanu, under index No. 6326/09. Motion by the respondent Attorney General of the State of New York pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) to dismiss the petition.

Ordered that the motion is denied, without costs or disbursements; 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 [1981]). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought. Eng, P.J., Chambers, Roman and Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

107 A.D.3d 906, 966 N.Y.S.2d 869, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/veleanu-v-dolan-nyappdiv-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack