Hussain v. Donovan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hussain v. Donovan

73 A.D.3d 573, 899 N.Y.S.2d 851

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

DecidedMay 20, 2010

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 73 A.D.3d 573 (Hussain v. Donovan) 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

Hussain v. Donovan, 73 A.D.3d 573, 899 N.Y.S.2d 851 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

Determination of respondent New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD), dated June 27, 2008, terminating petitioner’s Section 8 housing subsidy, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied, and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of Supreme Court, New York County [Marylin G. Diamond, J.], entered June 26, 2009), dismissed, without costs.

HPD’s determination was supported by substantial evidence showing that petitioner violated HPD’s policy requiring truthful and complete reporting of family composition on the subject application and recertification forms (see Matter of Gerena v Donovan, 51 AD3d 502 [2008]). There exists no basis to disturb the hearing officer’s credibility determinations (see Matter of Berenhaus v Ward, 70 NY2d 436, 443-444 [1987]).

The penalty imposed was not so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see Matter of Gerena, 51 AD3d at 502).

[574]*574We have considered petitioner’s remaining arguments, including that he was afforded ineffective assistance of counsel, and find them unavailing. Concur—Gonzalez, P.J., Friedman, DeGrasse, Manzanet-Daniels and Román, JJ.

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

Determination of respondent New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD), dated June 27, 2008, terminating petitioner’s Section 8 housing subsidy, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied, and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of Supreme Court, New York County [Marylin G. Diamond, J.], entered June 26, 2009), dismissed, without costs.

HPD’s determination was supported by substantial evidence showing that petitioner violated HPD’s policy requiring truthful and complete reporting of family composition on the subject application and recertification forms (see Matter of Gerena v Donovan, 51 AD3d 502 [2008]). There exists no basis to disturb the hearing officer’s credibility determinations (see Matter of Berenhaus v Ward, 70 NY2d 436, 443-444 [1987]).

The penalty imposed was not so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see Matter of Gerena, 51 AD3d at 502).

[574]*574We have considered petitioner’s remaining arguments, including that he was afforded ineffective assistance of counsel, and find them unavailing. Concur—Gonzalez, P.J., Friedman, DeGrasse, Manzanet-Daniels and Román, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

73 A.D.3d 573, 899 N.Y.S.2d 851, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hussain-v-donovan-nyappdiv-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack