Aniolek v. Conservation Department

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Aniolek v. Conservation Department

267 A.D. 795, 45 N.Y.S.2d 534, 1943 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6258

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 28, 1943

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 267 A.D. 795 (Aniolek v. Conservation Department) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Aniolek v. Conservation Department, 267 A.D. 795, 45 N.Y.S.2d 534, 1943 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6258 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

This is a review under article 78 of the Civil Practice Act of a determination of the Conservation Commissioner discharging petitioner, a game protector. Petitioner was accused of trapping activities during the months of December, 1940, and January and February, 1941. During the same period he was also charged with setting snares by which animals were taken. The Commissioner made no findings and for that reason alone we are required to annul the determination. (Matter of Elite Dairy Products v. -Ten Eyck, 271 N. Y. 488; Matter of New York Water Service Corp. v. Water Power & Control Comm., 283 N. Y. 23.) In addition to that the proof as to petitioner’s guilt is based on evidence that is unsubstantial and inconclusive. Determination annulled on the law and facts, with fifty dollars costs and disbursements to petitioner, and the matter is remitted to the Conservation Commissioner for further consideration with the right to either party to offer any additional testimony. All concur.

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

This is a review under article 78 of the Civil Practice Act of a determination of the Conservation Commissioner discharging petitioner, a game protector. Petitioner was accused of trapping activities during the months of December, 1940, and January and February, 1941. During the same period he was also charged with setting snares by which animals were taken. The Commissioner made no findings and for that reason alone we are required to annul the determination. (Matter of Elite Dairy Products v. -Ten Eyck, 271 N. Y. 488; Matter of New York Water Service Corp. v. Water Power & Control Comm., 283 N. Y. 23.) In addition to that the proof as to petitioner’s guilt is based on evidence that is unsubstantial and inconclusive. Determination annulled on the law and facts, with fifty dollars costs and disbursements to petitioner, and the matter is remitted to the Conservation Commissioner for further consideration with the right to either party to offer any additional testimony. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

267 A.D. 795, 45 N.Y.S.2d 534, 1943 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6258, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aniolek-v-conservation-department-nyappdiv-1943.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack