Opinion
October 28, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rozenzweig, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
It is well settled that the extraordinary remedy of prohibition is not available to prevent even ultra vires administrative action when the party seeking such relief may pursue other avenues of judicial review without sustaining irreparable injury (see, Matter of American Tr. Ins. Co. v. Corcoran, 65 N.Y.2d 828; Matter of City of Newburgh v. Public Employment Relations Bd., 63 N.Y.2d 793). In the instant matter, even assuming that the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal was without authority (see, 9 NYCRR 2529.9) to reopen the proceedings dealing with the landlords' application for rent increases, based upon its admitted failure to consider "vital" matters, the landlords will have an opportunity to obtain judicial review in the event that they are ultimately aggrieved by a determination of the agency. Accordingly, in the absence of any evidence that the landlords will suffer irreparable harm, we find no impropriety in denying prohibition. Kooper, J.P., Sullivan, Miller and O'Brien, JJ., concur.