The respondent IAS Court erred in granting respondent-defendant's pre-trial motion to disqualify petitioner's Assistant District Attorney. Contrary to the Court of Appeals' holding in People v. Paperno ( 54 N.Y.2d 294, 296, 303), the motion was granted despite the absence of "a significant showing that the prosecutor's prior investigative or prosecutorial conduct will be a material issue at the trial", or, alternatively, any allegations that the prosecutor might seek to influence the jury by "injecting his own credibility into the trial". In so doing, the IAS Court acted arbitrarily, exceeding its authority (see, La Rocca v. Lane, 37 N.Y.2d 575, 578-579, cert denied 424 U.S. 968; Matter of Schumer v. Holtzman, 60 N.Y.2d 46, 51), warranting our grant of the writ.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Carro, Wallach, Williams and Tom, JJ.