Cubilete v. Morales
This text of 92 A.D.3d 470 (Cubilete v. Morales) 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.
Opinion
The hearing officer’s findings of willful misrepresentation, nonverifiable income and breach of rules and regulations are supported by substantial evidence. Moreover, given petitioner’s misconduct over a four-year period, the penalty of termination does not shock one’s sense of fairness, notwithstanding the hardship to petitioner (see Matter of Bland v New York City Hous. Auth., 72 AD3d 528, 528 [2010]; Matter of Smith v New York City Hous. Auth., 40 AD3d 235 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 816 [2007]).
We have considered petitioner’s remaining contentions and [471]*471find them unavailing. Concur — Tom, J.E, Mazzarelli, Renwick, Freedman and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
92 A.D.3d 470, 937 N.Y.2d 851, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cubilete-v-morales-nyappdiv-2012.