De Marco v. Perales

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

De Marco v. Perales

111 A.D.2d 920, 491 N.Y.S.2d 34, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50187

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

DecidedJune 24, 1985

StatusPublished

This text of 111 A.D.2d 920 (De Marco v. Perales) 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

De Marco v. Perales, 111 A.D.2d 920, 491 N.Y.S.2d 34, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50187 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of the New York State Department of Social Services, dated May 19, 1983, which, after a fair hearing, sustained a determination of the local agency terminating petitioner’s eligibility for public assistance.

Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.

There was substantial evidence to support the determination. We particularly note (1) the testimony of Ms. Mittendorf, the local agency’s investigator, based on her contemporary notes of the interviews with petitioner as to the identity of the father of the as yet unborn child and as to the reason why she had earlier stated that the father was unknown, and (2) the fact that petitioner’s counsel at the fair hearing chose neither to cross-examine the investigator nor to examine her notes. 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

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of the New York State Department of Social Services, dated May 19, 1983, which, after a fair hearing, sustained a determination of the local agency terminating petitioner’s eligibility for public assistance.

Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.

There was substantial evidence to support the determination. We particularly note (1) the testimony of Ms. Mittendorf, the local agency’s investigator, based on her contemporary notes of the interviews with petitioner as to the identity of the father of the as yet unborn child and as to the reason why she had earlier stated that the father was unknown, and (2) the fact that petitioner’s counsel at the fair hearing chose neither to cross-examine the investigator nor to examine her notes. Lazer, J. P., Mangano, Gibbons and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 A.D.2d 920, 491 N.Y.S.2d 34, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50187, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/de-marco-v-perales-nyappdiv-1985.