DeCostole Carting, Inc. v. Business Integrity Commission

2 A.D.3d 225, 768 N.Y.S.2d 317, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13220
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 11, 2003
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 2 A.D.3d 225 (DeCostole Carting, Inc. v. Business Integrity Commission) 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
DeCostole Carting, Inc. v. Business Integrity Commission, 2 A.D.3d 225, 768 N.Y.S.2d 317, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13220 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Lewis Bart Stone, J), entered June 24, 2003, which, inter alia, denied the petition brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 to annul respondent’s determination denying petitioner a waste-carting license, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The discretionary refusal to grant the license was within the Commission’s statutory authority and petitioner had no property interest in licensure or a due process right to a hearing in connection therewith (see Matter of Daxor Corp. v State of New York Dept. of Health, 90 NY2d 89 [1997]; Matter of Hollywood Carting Corp. v City of New York, 288 AD2d 71 [2001]; Sanitation & Recycling Indus., Inc. v City of New York, 107 F3d 985 [1997]).

A review of the record confirms that there was a rational basis for respondent’s findings that petitioner, by participating in the mob-controlled waste cartel’s property rights system, failing to provide truthful information to the Commission and obstructing a 2002 investigation into alleged deceptive trade practices, committed anticompetitive racketeering acts, and that the Commission’s consequent determination that petitioner did not possess the requisite “character, honesty and integrity” for licensure was not arbitrary and capricious (see Administrative Code of City of NY § 16-509 [a]; Toed Bros. v Trade Waste Commn. of City of N.Y., 251 AD2d 160 [1998], lv denied 92 NY2d 812 [1998]; Matter of Hollywood Carting Corp. v City of New York, supra).

We have considered petitioner’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Nardelli, J.P., Tom, Mazzarelli and Ellerin, JJ.

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

Related

Elite Demolition Contracting Corp. v. City of New York
125 A.D.3d 576 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
CRP Sanitation, Inc. v. Solid Waste Commission
86 A.D.3d 608 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
City Services, Inc. v. Neiman
77 A.D.3d 505 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Interstate Materials Corp. v. City of New York
48 A.D.3d 464 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
DeCostello Carting, Inc. v. McCormack
16 Misc. 3d 421 (New York Supreme Court, 2007)
DeCostole Carting, Inc. v. Maldonado
35 A.D.3d 648 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
DeCostello Carting, Inc. v. Maldonado
2004 NY Slip Op 50239(U) (New York Supreme Court, Kings County, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2 A.D.3d 225, 768 N.Y.S.2d 317, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13220, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/decostole-carting-inc-v-business-integrity-commission-nyappdiv-2003.