Patistas v. New York State Racing & Wagering Board

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Patistas v. New York State Racing & Wagering Board

1 A.D.2d 1003, 767 N.Y.S.2d 924, 1 A.D.3d 1003, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12286

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

DecidedNovember 21, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 1 A.D.2d 1003 (Patistas v. New York State Racing & Wagering Board) 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

Patistas v. New York State Racing & Wagering Board, 1 A.D.2d 1003, 767 N.Y.S.2d 924, 1 A.D.3d 1003, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12286 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

CPLR article 78 proceeding transferred to this Court by an order of Supreme Court, Erie County (Siwek, J), entered March 21, 2003, to review a determination of respondent which, after a hearing, revoked petitioner’s license as an owner/driver of harness racing horses.

[1004]*1004It is hereby ordered that the determination be and the same hereby is unanimously confirmed without costs and the petition is dismissed.

Memorandum: In this CPLR article 78 proceeding, petitioner challenges respondent’s determination that he violated 9 NYCRR 4102.2, 4119.7 (a) (3), 4119.9 (a), 4119.10, and 4120.6 (a) (1) and (c), by possessing drugs, unlabeled vials, syringes, and needles with the intention of administering drugs to his horses on a day that they were scheduled to race. Contrary to the contention of petitioner, substantial evidence supports respondent’s determination that petitioner attempted to violate respondent’s drug rules (see 9 NYCRR 4102.2). We reject the further contention of petitioner that the penalty of revocation of his license is “so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness” (Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 NY2d 222, 237 [1974]; see Matter of DeBonis v Corbisiero, 155 AD2d 299, 302 [1989], lv denied 75 NY2d 709 [1990], cert denied 496 US 938 [1990]; see generally Matter of Harp v New York City Police Dept., 96 NY2d 892, 894 [2001]). Present—Pigott, Jr., PJ, Green, Scudder, Kehoe and Hayes, JJ.

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

CPLR article 78 proceeding transferred to this Court by an order of Supreme Court, Erie County (Siwek, J), entered March 21, 2003, to review a determination of respondent which, after a hearing, revoked petitioner’s license as an owner/driver of harness racing horses.

[1004]*1004It is hereby ordered that the determination be and the same hereby is unanimously confirmed without costs and the petition is dismissed.

Memorandum: In this CPLR article 78 proceeding, petitioner challenges respondent’s determination that he violated 9 NYCRR 4102.2, 4119.7 (a) (3), 4119.9 (a), 4119.10, and 4120.6 (a) (1) and (c), by possessing drugs, unlabeled vials, syringes, and needles with the intention of administering drugs to his horses on a day that they were scheduled to race. Contrary to the contention of petitioner, substantial evidence supports respondent’s determination that petitioner attempted to violate respondent’s drug rules (see 9 NYCRR 4102.2). We reject the further contention of petitioner that the penalty of revocation of his license is “so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness” (Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 NY2d 222, 237 [1974]; see Matter of DeBonis v Corbisiero, 155 AD2d 299, 302 [1989], lv denied 75 NY2d 709 [1990], cert denied 496 US 938 [1990]; see generally Matter of Harp v New York City Police Dept., 96 NY2d 892, 894 [2001]). Present—Pigott, Jr., PJ, Green, Scudder, Kehoe and Hayes, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 A.D.2d 1003, 767 N.Y.S.2d 924, 1 A.D.3d 1003, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12286, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/patistas-v-new-york-state-racing-wagering-board-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack