Del Valle v. Kelly

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Del Valle v. Kelly

37 A.D.3d 311, 828 N.Y.S.2d 891

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

DecidedFebruary 20, 2007

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 37 A.D.3d 311 (Del Valle v. Kelly) 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

Del Valle v. Kelly, 37 A.D.3d 311, 828 N.Y.S.2d 891 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Determination of respondents dated July 27, 2004, revoking petitioner’s handgun licenses, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Paul G. Feinman, J.], entered May 6, 2005) dismissed, without costs.

The penalty of revocation does not shock our sense of fairness (see Matter of Kelly v Safir, 96 NY2d 32, 38 [2001]), where petitioner, a retired police officer, failed to immediately notify the License Division of his two arrests and the order of protection issued against him, in compliance with 38 RCNY 5-22 (c) (1) and (8). Concur—Friedman, J.P, Nardelli, Buckley, Catterson and McGuire, JJ.

[312]*31237 APPELLATE DIVISION REPORTS, 3d SERIES

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

Determination of respondents dated July 27, 2004, revoking petitioner’s handgun licenses, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Paul G. Feinman, J.], entered May 6, 2005) dismissed, without costs.

The penalty of revocation does not shock our sense of fairness (see Matter of Kelly v Safir, 96 NY2d 32, 38 [2001]), where petitioner, a retired police officer, failed to immediately notify the License Division of his two arrests and the order of protection issued against him, in compliance with 38 RCNY 5-22 (c) (1) and (8). Concur—Friedman, J.P, Nardelli, Buckley, Catterson and McGuire, JJ.

[312]*31237 APPELLATE DIVISION REPORTS, 3d SERIES

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

37 A.D.3d 311, 828 N.Y.S.2d 891, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/del-valle-v-kelly-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack