Matter of Jackson v Lawrence

Annotate this Case
Matter of Matter of Jackson v Lawrence 2012 NY Slip Op 06606 Decided on October 3, 2012 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on October 3, 2012
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKAPPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
PETER B. SKELOS, J.P.
RUTH C. BALKIN
JOHN M. LEVENTHAL
JEFFREY A. COHEN, JJ.
2012-03230 DECISION, ORDER & JUDGMENT

[*1]In the Matter of Erwin Jackson, petitioner,

v

Paul S. Lawrence, etc., et al., respondents. Erwin Jackson, Elmira, N.Y., petitioner pro se.




Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York, N.Y. (Michael
J. Siudzinski of counsel), for respondents.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, in the nature of prohibition to prohibit the respondents from "further enforcement and utilization" of a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered March 21, 1979, in a criminal action entitled People v Jackson, under Indictment No. 47771/78, and application by the petitioner for poor person relief.

ORDERED that the application for poor person relief is granted to the extent that the filing fee imposed by CPLR 8022(b) is waived, and the application is otherwise denied; and it is further,

ADJUDGED that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, 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 NY2d 564, 569; see Matter of Rush v Mordue, 68 NY2d 348, 352).

The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought.
SKELOS, J.P., BALKIN, LEVENTHAL and COHEN, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.