Bianco v. City of Rochester

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bianco v. City of Rochester

154 A.D.2d 922

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

DecidedOctober 6, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 154 A.D.2d 922 (Bianco v. City of Rochester) 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

Bianco v. City of Rochester, 154 A.D.2d 922 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

Determination unanimously modified on the law without costs and as modified confirmed and matter remitted to respondent for further proceedings, all in accordance with the following memorandum: The determination of the Chief of Police sustaining charges that petitioners violated enumerated provisions of the City of Rochester Municipal Code is supported by substantial evidence (see, 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176; Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222). We conclude, however, that the penalty imposed was " 'so disproportionate to the offense, in the light of all the circumstances, as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness’ ” (Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., supra, at 233). Accordingly, we remit the matter to respondent to reconsider the penalty, not to exceed a six-month suspension of petitioners’ entertainment center and amusement center licenses. (Article 78 proceeding transferred by order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Curran, J.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Boomer, Lawton and Davis, JJ. 88 In the Matter of Robert J. Stone, as Commissioner of

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

Determination unanimously modified on the law without costs and as modified confirmed and matter remitted to respondent for further proceedings, all in accordance with the following memorandum: The determination of the Chief of Police sustaining charges that petitioners violated enumerated provisions of the City of Rochester Municipal Code is supported by substantial evidence (see, 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176; Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222). We conclude, however, that the penalty imposed was " 'so disproportionate to the offense, in the light of all the circumstances, as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness’ ” (Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., supra, at 233). Accordingly, we remit the matter to respondent to reconsider the penalty, not to exceed a six-month suspension of petitioners’ entertainment center and amusement center licenses. (Article 78 proceeding transferred by order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Curran, J.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Boomer, Lawton and Davis, JJ. 88 In the Matter of Robert J. Stone, as Commissioner of

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

154 A.D.2d 922, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bianco-v-city-of-rochester-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack