Somma v. Waterfront Commission

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Somma v. Waterfront Commission

56 A.D.2d 849, 392 N.Y.S.2d 92, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11189

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

DecidedMarch 7, 1977

StatusPublished

This text of 56 A.D.2d 849 (Somma v. Waterfront Commission) 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

Somma v. Waterfront Commission, 56 A.D.2d 849, 392 N.Y.S.2d 92, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11189 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding, inter alia, to review a determination of the Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor, dated December 4, 1974, which denied petitioner’s application for restoration of his registration as a checker, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated May 10, 1976, which granted the petition, set aside the determination and directed that petitioner be reinstated. Judgment reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, determination of the waterfront commission reinstated, and proceeding dismissed on the merits. Section 7 of article XI of the Waterfront Commission Compact (L 1953, ch 882 § 1), authorizes the judicial review of a denial by the waterfront commission of an application for restoration of a registration. The denial of petitioner’s application was neither arbitrary nor capricious. The sanction of dismissal for petitioner’s misappropriation of 25 bags of coffee, each bag of which weighed 66 pounds, was not excessive (see Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Cohalan, Damiani and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding, inter alia, to review a determination of the Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor, dated December 4, 1974, which denied petitioner’s application for restoration of his registration as a checker, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated May 10, 1976, which granted the petition, set aside the determination and directed that petitioner be reinstated. Judgment reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, determination of the waterfront commission reinstated, and proceeding dismissed on the merits. Section 7 of article XI of the Waterfront Commission Compact (L 1953, ch 882 § 1), authorizes the judicial review of a denial by the waterfront commission of an application for restoration of a registration. The denial of petitioner’s application was neither arbitrary nor capricious. The sanction of dismissal for petitioner’s misappropriation of 25 bags of coffee, each bag of which weighed 66 pounds, was not excessive (see Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Cohalan, Damiani and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

56 A.D.2d 849, 392 N.Y.S.2d 92, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11189, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/somma-v-waterfront-commission-nyappdiv-1977.