Triangle Auto Body, Inc. v. Department of Consumer Affairs

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Triangle Auto Body, Inc. v. Department of Consumer Affairs

198 A.D.2d 226, 604 N.Y.S.2d 792, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10130

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

DecidedNovember 1, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 198 A.D.2d 226 (Triangle Auto Body, Inc. v. Department of Consumer Affairs) 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

Triangle Auto Body, Inc. v. Department of Consumer Affairs, 198 A.D.2d 226, 604 N.Y.S.2d 792, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10130 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination by the respondent Department of Consumer Affairs of the City of New York, dated January 10, 1991, which, inter alia, imposed a civil penalty of $1,500 for violation of Administrative Code of the City of New York § 20-513, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Posner, J.), dated June 27, 1991, which dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the respondent’s determination that the petitioner violated Administrative Code § 20-513 was supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Interliners Lounge Social Club v Department of [227]*227Consumer Affairs, 176 AD2d 169; Born Again Salvage Corp. v Ratner, 88 AD2d 943). Further, the penalty imposed was not so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see, Born Again Salvage Corp. v Ratner, supra). Bracken, J. P., Balletta, Fiber and Pizzuto, 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 determination by the respondent Department of Consumer Affairs of the City of New York, dated January 10, 1991, which, inter alia, imposed a civil penalty of $1,500 for violation of Administrative Code of the City of New York § 20-513, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Posner, J.), dated June 27, 1991, which dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the respondent’s determination that the petitioner violated Administrative Code § 20-513 was supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Interliners Lounge Social Club v Department of [227]*227Consumer Affairs, 176 AD2d 169; Born Again Salvage Corp. v Ratner, 88 AD2d 943). Further, the penalty imposed was not so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see, Born Again Salvage Corp. v Ratner, supra). Bracken, J. P., Balletta, Fiber and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

198 A.D.2d 226, 604 N.Y.S.2d 792, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10130, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/triangle-auto-body-inc-v-department-of-consumer-affairs-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack