Property Clerk of New York City Police Department v. Krasnik

41 A.D.3d 245, 836 N.Y.S.2d 873
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 19, 2007·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Martin Shulman, J.), entered July 21, 2006, which granted plaintiffs motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that defendant pleaded guilty to driving while intoxicated, and that he was driving the vehicle that is the subject of this forfeiture proceeding at the time he committed the crime. Defendant’s conviction is conclusive proof of the underlying facts. Even if he had sought to dispute his conviction or the underlying facts on this appeal, he would be collaterally estopped from relitigating those facts herein (see Grayes v DiStasio, 166 AD2d 261 [1990]). Concur—Marlow, J.P., Williams, Gonzalez, Catterson and McGuire, JJ.

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

Property Clerk of New York City Police Department v. Krasnik, 41 A.D.3d 245, 836 N.Y.S.2d 873 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

41 A.D.3d 245 (Property Clerk of New York City Police Department v. Krasnik) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hill v. New York City Housing Authority
111 A.D.3d 462 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)