In re Gold
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, without costs, and the petition dismissed. It was error for Supreme Court to have entertained the application for article 78 relief in the nature of prohibition since that extraordinary remedy may ordinarily be employed only when a court acts or threatens to act “without jurisdiction in a matter over which it has no power over the subject matter or where it exceeds its authorized powers in a proceeding over which it has jurisdiction” (Matter of State of New York v King, 36 NY2d 59, 62). Our determination…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- MATTER OF STATE OF NY v. KingNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
3Cited by15 opinions
- Morgenthau v. ErlbaumNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- MATTER OF MULVANEY v. DubinNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
- Jacobs v. AltmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
- Morgenthau v. AltmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- Hynes v. TomeiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.