Henry v. D'Elia

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Henry v. D'Elia

92 A.D.2d 548, 459 N.Y.S.2d 411, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16772

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

DecidedFebruary 7, 1983

StatusPublished

This text of 92 A.D.2d 548 (Henry v. D'Elia) 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

Henry v. D'Elia, 92 A.D.2d 548, 459 N.Y.S.2d 411, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16772 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

— Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alla, to review a determination of the respondent State Commissioner of Social Services, dated May 5, 1981 and made after a statutory fair hearing, which affirmed a determination of the local agency to deny petitioner’s application for emergency assistance for adults. Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements. The determination that petitioner’s income would not permit ongoing payment of her utility bills was supported by substantial evidence in the record. Accordingly, it cannot be said that the denial of assistance was improper. Petitioner’s remaining allegations are similarly without merit. Mangano, J. P., Gulotta, Bracken and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

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

— Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alla, to review a determination of the respondent State Commissioner of Social Services, dated May 5, 1981 and made after a statutory fair hearing, which affirmed a determination of the local agency to deny petitioner’s application for emergency assistance for adults. Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements. The determination that petitioner’s income would not permit ongoing payment of her utility bills was supported by substantial evidence in the record. Accordingly, it cannot be said that the denial of assistance was improper. Petitioner’s remaining allegations are similarly without merit. Mangano, J. P., Gulotta, Bracken and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

92 A.D.2d 548, 459 N.Y.S.2d 411, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16772, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/henry-v-delia-nyappdiv-1983.