Matter of Witherspoon v Condon

Annotate this Case
Matter of Witherspoon v Condon 2016 NY Slip Op 08534 Decided on December 21, 2016 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on December 21, 2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, J.P.
SHERI S. ROMAN
ROBERT J. MILLER
BETSY BARROS, JJ.
2016-09867 DECISION, ORDER & JUDGMENT

[*1]In the Matter of Eric G. Witherspoon, petitioner,

v

William J. Condon, etc., respondent.



Eric G. Witherspoon, Stormville, NY, petitioner pro se.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York, NY (Charles F. Sanders of counsel), for respondent.



Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, in the nature of mandamus to compel the respondent William J. Condon, a Justice of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, inter alia, to vacate an order dated May 10, 2016, made in a criminal action entitled People v Witherspoon , under Suffolk County Indictment No. 983-95, 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 as academic; and it is further,

ADJUDGED that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.

The extraordinary remedy of mandamus will lie only to compel the performance of a ministerial act, and only where there exists a clear legal right to the relief sought (see Matter of Legal Aid Socy. of Sullivan County v Scheinman, 53 NY2d 12, 16). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought.

CHAMBERS, J.P., ROMAN, MILLER and BARROS, 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.