Nolan v. Lungen
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The judgment of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs.
This article 78 proceeding in the nature of prohibition was commenced in the Appellate Division, even though only the District Attorney of Sullivan County and the Chief Assistant District Attorney were named as respondents. We agree with the concurring opinion of Justice *790Paul J. Yesawich that the Appellate Division had no original jurisdiction to entertain the proceeding. CPLR 7804 (subd [b]) provides that: “A proceeding under this article shall be brought in the supreme court, special…
2Cited by61 opinions
- Card v. SiragusaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- Donaldson v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- Ferrick v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- Finley v. NicandriAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
- Reitman v. SobolAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
56 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.