Geller v. Board of Regents of the University

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Geller v. Board of Regents of the University

15 A.D.2d 686, 223 N.Y.S.2d 799, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11999

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

DecidedJanuary 17, 1962

StatusPublished

This text of 15 A.D.2d 686 (Geller v. Board of Regents of the University) 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

Geller v. Board of Regents of the University, 15 A.D.2d 686, 223 N.Y.S.2d 799, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11999 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

This is a proceeding under article 78 of the Civil Practice Act to review a determination of the Board of Regents revoking petitioner’s license to practice medicine. In the findings at all stages below it has been found that petitioner was convicted of a crime in the Court.of General Sessions of the County of New York; was convicted of a crime in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, and was guilty of fraud and deceit in the practice of medicine. Substantial evidence supports such findings. The Board of Regents had authority to increase the degree of discipline recommended by the subcommittee, and upon this record there is no justification for court interference with the determination revoking petitioner’s license, (Matter of Stolz v. Board of Regents, 4 A D 2d 361.) Determination unanimously confirmed, without costs. Present—Coon, J. P., Gibson, Herlihy, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ,

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

This is a proceeding under article 78 of the Civil Practice Act to review a determination of the Board of Regents revoking petitioner’s license to practice medicine. In the findings at all stages below it has been found that petitioner was convicted of a crime in the Court.of General Sessions of the County of New York; was convicted of a crime in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, and was guilty of fraud and deceit in the practice of medicine. Substantial evidence supports such findings. The Board of Regents had authority to increase the degree of discipline recommended by the subcommittee, and upon this record there is no justification for court interference with the determination revoking petitioner’s license, (Matter of Stolz v. Board of Regents, 4 A D 2d 361.) Determination unanimously confirmed, without costs. Present—Coon, J. P., Gibson, Herlihy, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ,

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

15 A.D.2d 686, 223 N.Y.S.2d 799, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11999, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/geller-v-board-of-regents-of-the-university-nyappdiv-1962.