
    In the Matter of Arthur Cockett, Petitioner, v Richard Ambro et al., Respondents.
    [913 NYS2d 580]
   Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of prohibition to prohibit the respondents from proceeding with a criminal action entitled People v Cockett, pending in the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, under indictment No. 769B/09.

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

“Because of its extraordinary nature, prohibition is available only where there is a clear legal right, and then only when a court — in cases where judicial authority is challenged — acts or threatens to act either without jurisdiction or in excess of its authorized powers” (Matter of Holtzman v Goldman, 71 NY2d 564, 569 [1988]; see Matter of Rush v Mordue, 68 NY2d 348, 352 [1986]). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought. Skelos, J.P., Dickerson, Belen and Lott, JJ., concur.  