Kahn v. State of New York Department of Motor Vehicles

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kahn v. State of New York Department of Motor Vehicles

134 A.D.2d 594, 521 N.Y.S.2d 494, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50802

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 30, 1987·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Department of Motor Vehicles, dated May 22, 1986, which sustained a finding of an Administrative Law Judge that the petitioner had violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1111 (d) (1) and imposed a fine of $50.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

The determination that the petitioner violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1111 (d) (1) is supported by substantial evidence in the record and must be confirmed (see, Matter of McKenzie v Fisher, 39 NY2d 103). The petitioner’s challenge to the administrative determination rests primarily upon an issue of credibility which was for the hearing body to resolve (see, Matter of Silberfarb v Board of Coop. Educ. Servs., 60 NY2d 979; Matter of Collins v Codd, 38 NY2d 269, 270-271). The testimony of the police officer who issued the summons to the petitioner was not incredible as a matter of law, and was sufficient by itself to sustain the respondent’s burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence (see, Vehicle and Traffic Law § 227 [1]) that the petitioner violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1111 (d) (1) by driving his vehicle through a steady red signal.

We further find that the petitioner was accorded a fair and full review upon his administrative appeal before the respondent. Thompson, J. P., Niehoff, Rubin and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

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

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Department of Motor Vehicles, dated May 22, 1986, which sustained a finding of an Administrative Law Judge that the petitioner had violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1111 (d) (1) and imposed a fine of $50.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

The determination that the petitioner violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1111 (d) (1) is supported by substantial evidence in the record and must be confirmed (see, Matter of McKenzie v Fisher, 39 NY2d 103). The petitioner’s challenge to the administrative determination rests primarily upon an issue of credibility which was for the hearing body to resolve (see, Matter of Silberfarb v Board of Coop. Educ. Servs., 60 NY2d 979; Matter of Collins v Codd, 38 NY2d 269, 270-271). The testimony of the police officer who issued the summons to the petitioner was not incredible as a matter of law, and was sufficient by itself to sustain the respondent’s burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence (see, Vehicle and Traffic Law § 227 [1]) that the petitioner violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1111 (d) (1) by driving his vehicle through a steady red signal.

We further find that the petitioner was accorded a fair and full review upon his administrative appeal before the respondent. Thompson, J. P., Niehoff, Rubin and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

Kahn v. State of New York Department of Motor Vehicles, 134 A.D.2d 594, 521 N.Y.S.2d 494, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50802 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

134 A.D.2d 594 (Kahn v. State of New York Department of Motor Vehicles) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related