Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Citation
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Parent Document
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Jurisdiction
- New York (state)
- Effective Date
- 1993-12-07
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6103695/brusco-v-braun/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (33)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
- Brusco v. Braun, 199 A.D.2d 27 (1993)
Full Text
572 charsSupreme Court dismissed the petition on the ground that mandamus does not lie to compel performance of a discretionary act (citing Klostermann v Cuomo, 61 NY2d 525, 539). As authority for the proposition that the holding of an inquest upon default in a nonpayment proceeding is discretionary, the court relied on Matter of Park Holding Co. v Arber (145 Misc 2d 39). However, the reasoning of this case is fatally flawed, and its conclusion that inquest is a prerequisite to judgment in every summary proceeding to recover possession of real property is entirely erroneous.