Skinner v. Amodio

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Skinner v. Amodio

8 A.D.3d 395, 777 N.Y.S.2d 710, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7857

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

DecidedJune 7, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 8 A.D.3d 395 (Skinner v. Amodio) 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

Skinner v. Amodio, 8 A.D.3d 395, 777 N.Y.S.2d 710, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7857 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determina[396]*396tion of the respondents dated June 12, 2002, which denied the petitioner benefits pursuant to General Municipal Law § 207-a, the petitioner appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Zambelli, J.), dated April 3, 2003, which denied the petition, granted the respondents’ motion to dismiss the proceeding, and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The challenged determination was not arbitrary or capricious (see CPLR 7803 [3]; Matter of Cole-Hatchard v Sherwood, 309 AD2d 933 [2003]).

The petitioner’s remaining contentions are without merit. H. Miller, J.P., Goldstein, Luciano and Spolzino, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determina[396]*396tion of the respondents dated June 12, 2002, which denied the petitioner benefits pursuant to General Municipal Law § 207-a, the petitioner appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Zambelli, J.), dated April 3, 2003, which denied the petition, granted the respondents’ motion to dismiss the proceeding, and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The challenged determination was not arbitrary or capricious (see CPLR 7803 [3]; Matter of Cole-Hatchard v Sherwood, 309 AD2d 933 [2003]).

The petitioner’s remaining contentions are without merit. H. Miller, J.P., Goldstein, Luciano and Spolzino, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 A.D.3d 395, 777 N.Y.S.2d 710, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7857, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/skinner-v-amodio-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack