Legal Opinion
Shillitani v. Valentine
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided June 27, 1945PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Per curiam
In proceedings in the nature of mandamus under article 78 of the Civil Practice Act, it is a fundamental rule that a peremptory order may not issue unless the petitioner has a clear legal right to the relief which he seeks. (Matter of Leitner v. New York Telephone Co., 277 N. Y. 180, 186.) On all the facts and circumstances disclosed in this record, it seems clear that petitioner was using the telephone in question to a large extent for unlawful activities in violation of sections 986 and 991 of the Penal Law, and there was enough to indicate that the facilities of the telephone company were…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Matter of Leitner v. New York Telephone Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1938
- People ex rel. Restmeyer v. New York Telephone Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1916
3Cited by5 opinions
- Pike v. Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1955
- People v. SteinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1952
- Rubin v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1962
- Rosner v. New York Telephone Co.New York Supreme Court · 1960
- Pike v. Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1955