IN RE: David COLLIC (1999)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

IN RE: David COLLIC, petitioner, v. Randall ENG, etc., et al., respondents.

Decided: April 05, 1999

SONDRA MILLER, J.P., FRED T. SANTUCCI, WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN and ANITA R. FLORIO, JJ.

David Collic, East Elmhurst, N.Y., petitioner pro se. Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (Jeanne M. Weisneck of counsel), respondent pro se, and for respondents Mitchell Weiss and Denise Itirino.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of prohibition, inter alia, to stay all actions and sentencing proceedings against the petitioner in the above-entitled matter, and application for poor person relief.

ORDERED that the application for poor person relief is granted; and it is further,

ADJUDGED that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

“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 N.Y.2d 564, 569, 528 N.Y.S.2d 21, 523 N.E.2d 297; see, Matter of Rush v. Mordue, 68 N.Y.2d 348, 352, 509 N.Y.S.2d 493, 502 N.E.2d 170). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network