Golia v. Velez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Golia v. Velez

97 A.D.3d 416, 948 N.Y.2d 63

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 3, 2012·Published

Opinion

Respondent’s determination was supported by substantial evidence (300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 180-181 [1978]), including the inspector’s testimony that the residence’s garage space had been converted into a separate dwelling unit, which was not permitted by the certificate of occupancy. Petitioner was provided with sufficient notice of the violation (see Matter of McDonald v Fischer, 93 AD3d 969, 969 [2012]).

We have considered petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur — Tom, J.P., Moskowitz, Renwick and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

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

Respondent’s determination was supported by substantial evidence (300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 180-181 [1978]), including the inspector’s testimony that the residence’s garage space had been converted into a separate dwelling unit, which was not permitted by the certificate of occupancy. Petitioner was provided with sufficient notice of the violation (see Matter of McDonald v Fischer, 93 AD3d 969, 969 [2012]).

We have considered petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur — Tom, J.P., Moskowitz, Renwick and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

Golia v. Velez, 97 A.D.3d 416, 948 N.Y.2d 63 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

97 A.D.3d 416 (Golia v. Velez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related