Martin v. Hostetter

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Martin v. Hostetter

31 A.D.2d 825, 298 N.Y.S.2d 23, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4598

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

DecidedFebruary 17, 1969

StatusPublished

This text of 31 A.D.2d 825 (Martin v. Hostetter) 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

Martin v. Hostetter, 31 A.D.2d 825, 298 N.Y.S.2d 23, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4598 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Determination of respondent, dated September 12, 1967, modified, on the law and in the exercise of discretion, by (1) striking out the provision that seven days of the suspension “ be served forthwith ” and providing, in lieu thereof, that said portion of the suspension be deferred under the same terms as were attached .to the deferment of the 10-day portion of the suspension and (2) by reducing the penal sum specified in the bond demand to $100. As so modified, determination confirmed, without costs. In our opinion the penalty imposed was excessive and constituted an abuse of discretion in the circumstances presented. Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Hopkins and Munder, JJ., concur; Rabin, J., dissents and votes to dismiss the proceeding on the merits and to confirm the determination.

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

Determination of respondent, dated September 12, 1967, modified, on the law and in the exercise of discretion, by (1) striking out the provision that seven days of the suspension “ be served forthwith ” and providing, in lieu thereof, that said portion of the suspension be deferred under the same terms as were attached .to the deferment of the 10-day portion of the suspension and (2) by reducing the penal sum specified in the bond demand to $100. As so modified, determination confirmed, without costs. In our opinion the penalty imposed was excessive and constituted an abuse of discretion in the circumstances presented. Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Hopkins and Munder, JJ., concur; Rabin, J., dissents and votes to dismiss the proceeding on the merits and to confirm the determination.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 A.D.2d 825, 298 N.Y.S.2d 23, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4598, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-v-hostetter-nyappdiv-1969.