Rapess v. Ortiz
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1DissentMurphy, P. J.
As the majority memorandum notes, this is a CPLR article 78 proceeding in the nature of mandamus. The law in this area has been succinctly stated in Matter of Colonial Beacon Oil Co. v Finn (245 App Div 459, 461, affd 270 NY 591): “A peremptory order of mandamus may be granted only to enforce a clear legal right. The mandamus issues to compel the performance of official duty clearly imposed by law, where there is no other adequate specific remedy. The duty must be positive, not discretionary, and the right to its performance must be so clear as not to admit of reasonable doubt or controversy.…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Matter of Burr v. . VoorhisNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
- Devens v. GokeyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1961
- Devens v. GokeyNew York Court of Appeals · 1961
- Doyon v. BascomAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1971
- Matter of Berger v. WalshNew York Court of Appeals · 1943
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.