Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996

McCall v. Roman

McCall v. Roman
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided March 25, 1996
225 A.D.2d 777; 640 N.Y.2d 152; 640 N.Y.S.2d 152; 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3205
McCall v. Roman

Opinion of the Court

*778"Because of its extraordinary nature, prohibition is available only where there is a clear legal right, and then only when a court — in cases where judicial authority is challenged — acts or threatens to act either without jurisdiction or in excess of its authorized powers” (Matter of Holtzman v Goldman, 71 NY2d 564, 569; see, Matter of Rush v Mordue, 68 NY2d 348, 352). Similarly, 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. v Scheinman, 53 NY2d 12, 16).

The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought. O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Hart and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.