Murad v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Murad v. City of New York

12 A.D.3d 193, 783 N.Y.S.2d 585, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13157

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

DecidedNovember 9, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 12 A.D.3d 193 (Murad v. City of New York) 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

Murad v. City of New York, 12 A.D.3d 193, 783 N.Y.S.2d 585, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13157 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment (denominated an order), Supreme Court, New York County (William A. Wetzel, J.), entered May 23, 2003, which dismissed the petition brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 seeking to compel renewal of a handgun carry permit, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The Police Commissioner’s revision of the handgun licensing regulations (38 RCNY 5-01), which eliminated the special category of permits for transporting a gun to a target range, was neither arbitrary nor capricious, and was a rational and proper exercise of authority (see Matter of Consolation Nursing Home v [194]*194Commissioner of N.Y. State Dept. of Health, 85 NY2d 326, 331 [1995]). Regulation of the number of firearms within the City is a rational means of promoting the safety and welfare of city residents and visitors (Matter of Caruso v Ward, 160 AD2d 540 [1990], lv denied 76 NY2d 706 [1990]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Andrias, Sullivan, Ellerin and Sweeny, JJ.

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

Judgment (denominated an order), Supreme Court, New York County (William A. Wetzel, J.), entered May 23, 2003, which dismissed the petition brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 seeking to compel renewal of a handgun carry permit, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The Police Commissioner’s revision of the handgun licensing regulations (38 RCNY 5-01), which eliminated the special category of permits for transporting a gun to a target range, was neither arbitrary nor capricious, and was a rational and proper exercise of authority (see Matter of Consolation Nursing Home v [194]*194Commissioner of N.Y. State Dept. of Health, 85 NY2d 326, 331 [1995]). Regulation of the number of firearms within the City is a rational means of promoting the safety and welfare of city residents and visitors (Matter of Caruso v Ward, 160 AD2d 540 [1990], lv denied 76 NY2d 706 [1990]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Andrias, Sullivan, Ellerin and Sweeny, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 A.D.3d 193, 783 N.Y.S.2d 585, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13157, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murad-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack