Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021

Matter of Sudbrink v. Garguilo

Matter of Sudbrink v. Garguilo
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided July 28, 2021
196 A.D.3d 695; 148 N.Y.S.3d 725; 2021 NY Slip Op 04554
Matter of Sudbrink v. Garguilo

Opinion

Matter of Sudbrink v Garguilo (2021 NY Slip Op 04554)
Matter of Sudbrink v Garguilo
2021 NY Slip Op 04554
Decided on July 28, 2021
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on July 28, 2021 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P.
BETSY BARROS
VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON
DEBORAH A. DOWLING, JJ.

2020-01835

[*1]In the Matter of Michael Sudbrink, petitioner,

v

Jerry Garguilo, etc., et al., respondents.




Letitia James, Attorney General, New York, NY (Theodore D. Sklar of counsel), for respondent Jerry Garguilo.

Timothy D. Sini, District Attorney, Riverhead, NY (Alfred Croce of counsel), for respondent Suffolk County District Attorney.

Zev Goldstein, Monsey, NY, for petitioner.



DECISION & JUDGMENT

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, in the nature of mandamus to compel the respondent Jerry Garguilo, an Associate Justice of the Appellate Term, 9th and 10th Judicial Districts, to grant the petitioner's application for a certificate granting leave to appeal to the Appellate Term, 9th and 10th Judicial Districts, from an order of the Justice Court of the Village of Babylon, Suffolk County, dated July 17, 2019.

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). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought.

The petitioner's remaining contention is without merit.

RIVERA, J.P., BARROS, BRATHWAITE NELSON and DOWLING, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court



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