MATTER OF AM. TRANSIT INS. CO. v. Corcoran
Cases that cite this one
35 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Beazer v. New York City Health (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2010)
- McIntosh v. Moscrip (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1988)
- Portillo v. Equinox Holdings, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2024)
- Pleskun v. Rogova (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2024)
- Wu v. Transue (District Court, E.D. New York 2024)
- Commandeer Realty Associates, Inc. v. Allegro (New York Supreme Court 2015)
- Stokes v. Komatsu America Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- Stokes v. Komatsu America Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- Gasland Petroleum, Inc. v. Planning Board of Town of Beekman (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2008)
- Menorah Campus Independent Senior Apartments, Inc. v. Novello (New York Supreme Court 2005)
- Washington v. Albany Housing Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2002)
- Medical Society of State of New York, Inc. v. Levin (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2001)
- Martinez v. New York City Transit Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2000)
- Bunt v. Altec Industries, Inc. (District Court, N.D. New York 1997)
- Whitfield v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
- Luc Leasing Corp. v. Muhl (New York Supreme Court 1997)
- Cleveland v. Department of Insurance (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1994)
- Rosier v. Brown (Rochester City Court 1993)
- Kreppein v. Celotex Corporation (2d Cir. 1992)
- Fili v. Matson Motors, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1992)
- Rivera v. Coughlin (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1992)
- Hall v. Coughlin (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1992)
- Kreppein v. Celotex Corp. (2d Cir. 1992)
- Venezia v. AdMinistrative Adjudication Bureau of Department of Motor Vehicles (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1991)
- Fleetwood Tenants Ass'n v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1991)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
*830 OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the opinion of Justice E. Leo Milonas.
In affirming, we note that respondents have not objected to the use of prohibition as a means of challenging respondent Superintendent’s action in appointing respondent Liebowitz to hear the charges against it. Prohibition is not available to prevent administrative action unless the agency is acting in a judicial or quasi-judicial capacity (see, Siegel, NY Prac § 559; 23 Carmody-Wait 2d, NY Civ Prac § 145:210) and even then it is generally not appropriate if another avenue of judicial review may be pursued without irreparable injury to the applicant (see, Matter of City of Newburgh v Public Employment Relations Bd., 63 NY2d 793). The Superintendent’s appointment in this case could have been challenged by an article 78 certiorari proceeding after the hearing and therefore a motion to dismiss the petition should have been made and granted (see also, Hecht v City of New York, 60 NY2d 57).
Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Jasen, Meyer, Simons, Kaye, Alexander and Titone concur.
Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.