Nisnewitz v. Board of Regents of University

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Nisnewitz v. Board of Regents of University

67 A.D.2d 743, 412 N.Y.S.2d 316, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10384

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

DecidedJanuary 4, 1979

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 67 A.D.2d 743 (Nisnewitz v. Board of Regents of University) 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

Nisnewitz v. Board of Regents of University, 67 A.D.2d 743, 412 N.Y.S.2d 316, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10384 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

— Proceeding initiated in this court, pursuant to subdivision 4 of section 6510 of the Education Law, to review a determination of the Board of Regents of the University of the State of New York which revoked petitioner’s license to engage in the practice of accounting in New York State. The petitioner does not dispute the fact that he has been convicted of a Federal crime and had been engaged in the unprofessional conduct of the falsification of bank loan applications. His sole contention is that the revocation of his license is an excessive punishment. However, a review of the record does not reveal any basis for interference by this court with the determination of the respondent (Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222). Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Greenblott, J. P., Staley, Jr., Main, Mikoll and Herlihy, JJ., concur.

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

— Proceeding initiated in this court, pursuant to subdivision 4 of section 6510 of the Education Law, to review a determination of the Board of Regents of the University of the State of New York which revoked petitioner’s license to engage in the practice of accounting in New York State. The petitioner does not dispute the fact that he has been convicted of a Federal crime and had been engaged in the unprofessional conduct of the falsification of bank loan applications. His sole contention is that the revocation of his license is an excessive punishment. However, a review of the record does not reveal any basis for interference by this court with the determination of the respondent (Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222). Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Greenblott, J. P., Staley, Jr., Main, Mikoll and Herlihy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

67 A.D.2d 743, 412 N.Y.S.2d 316, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10384, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nisnewitz-v-board-of-regents-of-university-nyappdiv-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack