Albanese v. Popolizio

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Albanese v. Popolizio

107 A.D.2d 748, 484 N.Y.S.2d 110, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 42656

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 22, 1985·Published

Opinion

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of respondent which fined petitioner $320, expelled him from the Rent Stabilization Association as to the apartment unit in question and placed that apartment under rent control, petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Golden, J.), entered June 23, 1983, which dismissed the proceeding.

Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The record reveals that a rational basis exists for respondent’s determination. The petitioner landlord failed for almost a year to make repairs required by law. In addition, petitioner failed to accede to the board’s efforts to obtain compliance with the law and he did not pay a fine imposed for said noncompliance. In light of all the circumstances of this case it cannot be said that the sanctions imposed are so disproportionate to the offense “ ‘as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness’ ” (Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222, 233). Lazer, J. P., Mangano, Gibbons and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of respondent which fined petitioner $320, expelled him from the Rent Stabilization Association as to the apartment unit in question and placed that apartment under rent control, petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Golden, J.), entered June 23, 1983, which dismissed the proceeding.

Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The record reveals that a rational basis exists for respondent’s determination. The petitioner landlord failed for almost a year to make repairs required by law. In addition, petitioner failed to accede to the board’s efforts to obtain compliance with the law and he did not pay a fine imposed for said noncompliance. In light of all the circumstances of this case it cannot be said that the sanctions imposed are so disproportionate to the offense “ ‘as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness’ ” (Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222, 233). Lazer, J. P., Mangano, Gibbons and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

Albanese v. Popolizio, 107 A.D.2d 748, 484 N.Y.S.2d 110, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 42656 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

107 A.D.2d 748 (Albanese v. Popolizio) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.