From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dombroff v. Spota

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 18, 2002
299 A.D.2d 484 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

2002-08908

November 18, 2002.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of mandamus, inter alia, to compel the respondents to disqualify themselves from prosecuting the petitioners under Suffolk County Indictment Nos. 449A/01 and 449D/01, and for the appointment of a Special District Attorney pursuant to County Law § 701.

Carl E. Person, New York, N.Y., for petitioners.

Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Craig D. Pavlik of counsel), respondent pro se, and for respondents Office of the District Attorney of Suffolk County and Thalia M. Stavrides.

SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, J.P., NANCY E. SMITH, CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.


DECISION, ORDER, JUDGMENT

Motion by the respondents to dismiss the proceeding.

ORDERED that the motion is granted; and it is further,

ADJUDGED that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, on the ground that this court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the matter (see CPLR 506[b][1]).

FEUERSTEIN, J.P., SMITH, O'BRIEN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Dombroff v. Spota

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 18, 2002
299 A.D.2d 484 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Dombroff v. Spota

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF RICHARD DOMBROFF, ET AL., PETITIONERS, v. THOMAS SPOTA…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Nov 18, 2002

Citations

299 A.D.2d 484 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
749 N.Y.S.2d 904