Case ID: ad3d_97/html/0741-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In the Matter of Maynard M. Archer, Petitioner, v Eric T. Schneiderman et al., Respondents.
    [947 NYS2d 916]
   “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 [1988]; see Matter of Rush v Mordue, 68 NY2d 348, 352 [1986]).

The petitioner failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought. Angiolillo, J.P., Dickerson, Chambers and Cohen, JJ., concur.