Ancis v. Lomenzo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ancis v. Lomenzo

31 A.D.2d 615, 295 N.Y.S.2d 784, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2702

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 12, 1968·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Determination revoking petitioner’s license as a real estate salesman, unanimously modified on the law and in the exercise of discretion to the extent of reducing the penalty to a three-month’s suspension, commencing from the date of the order to be entered hereon; and, as so modified, the determination is confirmed, without costs or disbursements. The enforcement of the revocation of petitioner’s license was stayed pending disposition of this article 78 proceeding, which was transferred to this court pursuant to CPLR 7804 (subd. [g]). The determination finding petitioner guilty of untrustworthiness is supported by substantial evidence. However, in our opinion, under all the circumstances, the penalty of revocation of petitioner’s license was excessive and unduly disproportionate to the offense. On the record before us, a suspension for a period of three months would be more appropriate. Concur—iStevens, J. P., Eager, Tilzer, McGivem and Rabin, JJ.

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

Determination revoking petitioner’s license as a real estate salesman, unanimously modified on the law and in the exercise of discretion to the extent of reducing the penalty to a three-month’s suspension, commencing from the date of the order to be entered hereon; and, as so modified, the determination is confirmed, without costs or disbursements. The enforcement of the revocation of petitioner’s license was stayed pending disposition of this article 78 proceeding, which was transferred to this court pursuant to CPLR 7804 (subd. [g]). The determination finding petitioner guilty of untrustworthiness is supported by substantial evidence. However, in our opinion, under all the circumstances, the penalty of revocation of petitioner’s license was excessive and unduly disproportionate to the offense. On the record before us, a suspension for a period of three months would be more appropriate. Concur—iStevens, J. P., Eager, Tilzer, McGivem and Rabin, JJ.

Ancis v. Lomenzo, 31 A.D.2d 615, 295 N.Y.S.2d 784, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2702 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

31 A.D.2d 615 (Ancis v. Lomenzo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related