FALBO, JR., JOHN v. FIALO, BARBARA J.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

FALBO, JR., JOHN v. FIALO, BARBARA J.

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

DecidedJuly 19, 2013

DocketTP 12-01670

StatusPublished

This text of FALBO, JR., JOHN v. FIALO, BARBARA J. (FALBO, JR., JOHN v. FIALO, BARBARA J.) 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

FALBO, JR., JOHN v. FIALO, BARBARA J., (N.Y. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

809 TP 12-01670 PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., SCONIERS, VALENTINO, WHALEN, AND MARTOCHE, JJ.

IN THE MATTER OF JOHN FALBO, JR., PETITIONER,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

BARBARA J. FIALO, NEW YORK STATE COMMISSIONER OF MOTOR VEHICLES, RESPONDENT.

JOHN FALBO, JR., PETITIONER PRO SE.

ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (FRANK K. WALSH OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department by order of the Supreme Court, Oneida County [Norman I. Siegel, A.J.], entered August 25, 2011) to review a determination of respondent. The determination suspended petitioner’s inspection station license and imposed a civil penalty of $1,750.

It is hereby ORDERED that the determination is unanimously confirmed without costs and the petition is dismissed.

Memorandum: Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking to annul the determination that he had violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 303 (e) (3) and 15 NYCRR 79.8 (c) (3) in connection with his business as a certified vehicle inspector. We conclude that the determination was supported by substantial evidence that petitioner refused to conduct an inspection and made affirmative misrepresentations regarding the number of inspection certificates that he had available (see generally Matter of Jennings v New York Off. of Mental Health, 90 NY2d 227, 239). Petitioner did not preserve for our review his additional contentions regarding new evidence and further justifications for his actions inasmuch as he did not raise those contentions before the Administrative Law Judge (see Matter of Gorman v New York State Dept. of Motor Vehs., 34 AD3d 1361, 1361).

Entered: July 19, 2013 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court

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

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

809 TP 12-01670 PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., SCONIERS, VALENTINO, WHALEN, AND MARTOCHE, JJ.

IN THE MATTER OF JOHN FALBO, JR., PETITIONER,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

BARBARA J. FIALO, NEW YORK STATE COMMISSIONER OF MOTOR VEHICLES, RESPONDENT.

JOHN FALBO, JR., PETITIONER PRO SE.

ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (FRANK K. WALSH OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department by order of the Supreme Court, Oneida County [Norman I. Siegel, A.J.], entered August 25, 2011) to review a determination of respondent. The determination suspended petitioner’s inspection station license and imposed a civil penalty of $1,750.

It is hereby ORDERED that the determination is unanimously confirmed without costs and the petition is dismissed.

Memorandum: Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking to annul the determination that he had violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 303 (e) (3) and 15 NYCRR 79.8 (c) (3) in connection with his business as a certified vehicle inspector. We conclude that the determination was supported by substantial evidence that petitioner refused to conduct an inspection and made affirmative misrepresentations regarding the number of inspection certificates that he had available (see generally Matter of Jennings v New York Off. of Mental Health, 90 NY2d 227, 239). Petitioner did not preserve for our review his additional contentions regarding new evidence and further justifications for his actions inasmuch as he did not raise those contentions before the Administrative Law Judge (see Matter of Gorman v New York State Dept. of Motor Vehs., 34 AD3d 1361, 1361).

Entered: July 19, 2013 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

FALBO, JR., JOHN v. FIALO, BARBARA J., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/falbo-jr-john-v-fialo-barbara-j-nyappdiv-2013.

Opinion

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack