From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Grace Sons v. New York St. D.M.V. [2d Dept 1999

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 2, 1999
(N.Y. App. Div. Dec. 2, 1999)

Opinion

Submitted October 20, 1999

December 2, 1999

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Appeals Board of the respondent New York State Department of Motor Vehicles, dated August 25, 1998, confirming a decision of an Administrative Law Judge, dated December 5, 1996, which, after a hearing, found the petitioner guilty of violating New York City Traffic Rule 4-15(b)(9), and imposed a penalty.

Vincent A. DeIorio, Purchase, N.Y. (Diane M. Lundin of counsel), for petitioner.

Eliot L. Spitzer, Attorney-General, New York, N.Y. (Michael S. Belohlavek and Thomas B. Litsky of counsel), for respondent.

LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, J.P., MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, HOWARD MILLER, JJ.


DECISION JUDGMENT

ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

"It is well settled that judicial review of a determination rendered by an administrative body after a hearing is limited to whether that determination is supported by substantial evidence upon the entire record" (Matter of Dienna v. Appeals Board of the Administrative Adjudication Bureau, ___ A.D.2d ___ [2d Dept., June 7, 1999], quoting Matter of Liuzzo v. State of New York Dept. of Motor Vehicles Appeals Bd., 209 A.D.2d 618 ; see, 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v. State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176 ; Matter of Jones v. Hudacs, 221 A.D.2d 531, 531-532 ). "A reviewing court may not weigh the evidence or reject the choice made by the Hearing Officer where there is conflicting evidence and room for choice exists" (Matter of McQueeney v. Dutchess County Sheriff, 223 A.D.2d 710, 711 ).

The respondent's Appeals Board concluded that there was clear and convincing evidence to support the determination of the Administrative Law Judge (see, Vehicle Traffic Law § 227;Matter of Pernick v. New York State Dept. of Motor Vehicles, 217 A.D.2d 630 ) that the petitioner violated New York City Traffic Rule 4-15(b)(9). That conclusion is supported by substantial evidence, and there is no reason to disturb it.

BRACKEN, J.P., ALTMAN, FRIEDMANN, and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Grace Sons v. New York St. D.M.V. [2d Dept 1999

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 2, 1999
(N.Y. App. Div. Dec. 2, 1999)
Case details for

Matter of Grace Sons v. New York St. D.M.V. [2d Dept 1999

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF ANTHONY GRACE SON, INC., petitioner, v. NEW YORK STATE…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Dec 2, 1999

Citations

(N.Y. App. Div. Dec. 2, 1999)