Matter of Jones v. Mccoy, 342 N.E.2d 602 (N.Y. 1975). · Go Syfert
Search
Matter of Jones v. Mccoy, 342 N.E.2d 602 (N.Y. 1975). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
3 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of Ernest K. Jones, Appellant,
v.
Thomas F. McCoy, as Administrator of the Judicial Conference of the State of New York, Et Al., Respondents
New York Court of Appeals.
Nov 19, 1975.
342 N.E.2d 602
1975 N.Y. LEXIS 2294
Ernest K Jones, appellant pro se., Michael Colodner and Michael R. Juviler for Thomas F. McCoy, respondent.
Cited by 4 opinions  |  Published

Memorandum. Before an employee of the unified court system may seek judicial relief, he must exhaust whatever administrative remedies have been made available to him (Matter of Kalichstein v McCoy, 23 NY2d 978, 980). Since petitioner had not exhausted his available remedy under 22 NYCRR 25.5, the court below properly dismissed this article 78 proceeding in the nature of mandamus. Moreover, the extraordinary remedy is available only when there is a clear legal right and is still subject to the exercise of discretion by the courts below, which this court might or might not have the power to review.

[*934] Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur; Chief Judge Breitel taking no part.

Order affirmed, without costs, in a memorandum.