Nardiello v. New York City Department of Correction

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Nardiello v. New York City Department of Correction

259 A.D.2d 269, 687 N.Y.S.2d 16, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2321

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

DecidedMarch 2, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 259 A.D.2d 269 (Nardiello v. New York City Department of Correction) 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

Nardiello v. New York City Department of Correction, 259 A.D.2d 269, 687 N.Y.S.2d 16, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2321 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Helen Freedman, J.), entered on or about November 14, 1997, which, in a proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 to annul respondents’ determination denying petitioner’s application for a firearms endorsement, dismissed the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In light of the evidence in the record indicating that petitioner was medically unfit to carry a firearm, it is plain that respondents’ determination not to issue a positive endorsement for petitioner’s New York City Pistol Permit application was neither arbitrary and capricious nor an abuse of discretion and, indeed, that it was entirely rational (see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222, 231). Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Wallach, Lerner and Rubin, JJ.

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

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Helen Freedman, J.), entered on or about November 14, 1997, which, in a proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 to annul respondents’ determination denying petitioner’s application for a firearms endorsement, dismissed the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In light of the evidence in the record indicating that petitioner was medically unfit to carry a firearm, it is plain that respondents’ determination not to issue a positive endorsement for petitioner’s New York City Pistol Permit application was neither arbitrary and capricious nor an abuse of discretion and, indeed, that it was entirely rational (see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222, 231). Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Wallach, Lerner and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

259 A.D.2d 269, 687 N.Y.S.2d 16, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2321, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nardiello-v-new-york-city-department-of-correction-nyappdiv-1999.