Article 78. Proceeding Against Body or Officer · Last amended 1963 · Last verified July 21, 2026
In one sentenceCPLR 7801 establishes the Article 78 proceeding as the modern replacement for the old writs of certiorari, mandamus, and prohibition, and bars its use to challenge a determination that isn't final or reviewable elsewhere, or one made in a civil action or criminal matter.
Full Text of CPLR 7801
Text size
Relief previously obtained by writs of certiorari to review, mandamus or prohibition shall be obtained in a proceeding under this article. Wherever in any statute reference is made to a writ or order of certiorari, mandamus or prohibition, such reference shall, so far as applicable, be deemed to refer to the proceeding authorized by this article. Except where otherwise provided by law, a proceeding under this article shall not be used to challenge a determination:
1. which is not final or can be adequately reviewed by appeal to a court or to some other body or officer or where the body or officer making the determination is expressly authorized by statute to rehear the matter upon the petitioner’s application unless the determination to be reviewed was made upon a rehearing, or a rehearing has been denied, or the time within which the petitioner can procure a rehearing has elapsed; or 2. which was made in a civil action or criminal matter unless it is an order summarily punishing a contempt committed in the presence of the court.
Plain-English Summary
New York once used three separate common-law writs to challenge government action: certiorari to review a decision, mandamus to compel one, and prohibition to stop one exceeding its authority. CPLR 7801 folds all three into a single unified vehicle, the Article 78 proceeding. Anywhere a statute still refers to one of those old writs, that reference is now read as pointing to a proceeding under this article. The result is one proceeding for challenging what a government body or officer has done, failed to do, or is about to do, in place of three overlapping and technical remedies.
That consolidation doesn't make Article 78 available for every grievance against a body or officer. The article can't be used to challenge a determination that isn't final, or one that could be adequately reviewed by appeal to a court or another body or officer, unless the determination under review was itself made on a rehearing, a rehearing was denied, or the time to request one has run out. Petitioners have to exhaust the ordinary channels for review before turning to Article 78, and a body or officer authorized to rehear a matter on the petitioner's application generally has to be given that chance first.
The article also steers clear of determinations made in a civil action or criminal matter, since those already have their own paths for review through appeal. The one exception carved back in covers an order summarily punishing a contempt committed in a court's presence, which can still be challenged through an Article 78 proceeding even though it arises inside a civil or criminal case.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is an Article 78 proceeding in New York?
It's the modern proceeding that replaced the old writs of certiorari, mandamus, and prohibition, letting a person challenge a government body or officer's action, inaction, or excess of authority in one unified proceeding rather than three separate common-law writs.
Is an Article 78 proceeding the same as New York mandamus?
Mandamus, the writ compelling an official to perform a duty, is one of the three remedies folded into Article 78. Relief once obtained through a writ of mandamus is now obtained through a proceeding under this article.
Is Article 78 New York's version of certiorari?
Yes. Certiorari to review, along with mandamus and prohibition, is now obtained through the single proceeding CPLR 7801 authorizes.
Can you bring an Article 78 proceeding to challenge any government decision?
No. The determination has to be final, or not adequately reviewable by appeal to a court or another body or officer, and if the body or officer is authorized to rehear the matter, the petitioner generally has to seek that rehearing first.
Can Article 78 be used to challenge something that happened in a civil lawsuit?
Generally no, determinations made in a civil action or criminal matter fall outside Article 78, except for an order summarily punishing a contempt committed in the court's presence.
What does it mean for a determination to be "final" for Article 78 purposes?
It generally means the agency or officer has reached the end of its own decision-making process on the matter, so there's nothing left for that body to reconsider before a court can step in.
Do you have to ask the agency to reconsider before filing an Article 78 petition?
If the body or officer is expressly authorized by statute to rehear the matter on the petitioner's application, yes, unless the determination under review already came from a rehearing, a rehearing was denied, or the time to seek one has expired.
Advisory Committee Notes
The first sentence of this section is derived from the second sentence of CPA § 1283. The first and third sentences of CPA § 1283 have been omitted as superfluous. “Classifications” of the writs of certiorari to review, mandamus and prohibition are not abolished by article 78 of the CPA or by this article since, as pointed out in the introduction, there are still significant differences among actions “in the nature of” certiorari, mandamus or prohibition. Abolition of the writs themselves, of course, is necessarily included in the provision replacing proceedings to obtain the writ with a proceeding for relief previously afforded by them. The provision of the third sentence of CPA § 1283 is also implicit in this section; moreover, many references in the Consolidated and Unconsolidated Laws to the writs have already been replaced with references to CPA article 78 or review by a court. Specific statutory references to the writ of mandamus are still found in many sections of the Public Authorities Law, while references to certiorari occur, for example, in § 336 of the Election Law, §§ 183 and 191 of the General Business Law and §§ 35, 38 and 82 of the General City Law.
The second sentence conforms to last sentence of CPA § 1283.
CPA § 1284 has been omitted as unnecessary. Its definitions added nothing to the sense of the first sentence in this section; they were based upon the underlying substantive law of certiorari, mandamus and prohibition which is not codified.
CPA §§ 1301 through 1306 have been omitted from this article. Sections 1301 (costs), 1303 (enforcement), 1304 (appeals), and 1305 (stays on appeal) dealt with matters common to other actions and proceedings; they have been dealt with in other articles. Similarly, § 1306, which made the rules dealing with actions applicable to this proceeding, are covered by a general provision for all proceedings. CPA § 1302, which permitted imposition of a fine of up to $250 to be paid to the state by an officer who had refused or neglected to perform a public duty has been transferred to the Public Officers Law.
The section indicates that no change from the present scope of an article 78 proceeding is intended. Following “appeal,” the Committee has added “to a court or to some other body or officer” from CPA § 1285(4), and from CPA § 1285(5) has been added the language, “the body or officer making the determination is expressly authorized by statute to rehear the matter upon the petitioner’s application unless the determination to be reviewed was made upon a rehearing, or a rehearing has been denied, or the time within which the petitioner can procure a hearing has elapsed.”
Amendment History
Add, L 1962, ch 308, eff Sept 1, 1963; amd, L 1962, ch 318, § 25, eff Sept 1, 1963.
Source & verification. Provision text, History, and Advisory
Committee Notes are reproduced verbatim from the Consolidated Laws of New York.
Last verified July 21, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as:Article 78 proceeding New YorkNew York mandamusNew York certiorarichallenge agency decision New Yorkhow to file an Article 78 petitionwrit of prohibition New York replacedwhat is Article 78