Moore v. State Department of Motor Vehicles

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Moore v. State Department of Motor Vehicles

117 A.D.3d 484, 985 N.Y.S.2d 239

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

DecidedMay 8, 2014

StatusPublished

This text of 117 A.D.3d 484 (Moore v. State Department of Motor Vehicles) 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

Moore v. State Department of Motor Vehicles, 117 A.D.3d 484, 985 N.Y.S.2d 239 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Determination of respondent’s appeals board, which affirmed, after a hearing, petitioner’s traffic conviction, 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 [Doris Ling-Cohan, J.], entered July 9, 2013), dismissed, without costs.

Respondent’s determination is supported by substantial evidence (see generally 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 180-181 [1978]). The officer who issued the subject summons testified that he observed petitioner driving her scooter at an excessive speed and making numerous lane changes without signaling (see 34 RCNY 4-02 [c]; Matter of Nelke v Department of Motor Vehs. of the State of N.Y., 79 AD3d 433 [1st Dept 2010]).

Concur — Saxe, J.E, Moskowitz, Freedman, Gische and Kapnick, JJ.

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

Determination of respondent’s appeals board, which affirmed, after a hearing, petitioner’s traffic conviction, 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 [Doris Ling-Cohan, J.], entered July 9, 2013), dismissed, without costs.

Respondent’s determination is supported by substantial evidence (see generally 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 180-181 [1978]). The officer who issued the subject summons testified that he observed petitioner driving her scooter at an excessive speed and making numerous lane changes without signaling (see 34 RCNY 4-02 [c]; Matter of Nelke v Department of Motor Vehs. of the State of N.Y., 79 AD3d 433 [1st Dept 2010]).

Concur — Saxe, J.E, Moskowitz, Freedman, Gische and Kapnick, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

117 A.D.3d 484, 985 N.Y.S.2d 239, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moore-v-state-department-of-motor-vehicles-nyappdiv-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack