TWA Carting Corp. v. Logrande

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

TWA Carting Corp. v. Logrande

121 A.D.2d 550, 503 N.Y.S.2d 540, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 58529

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

DecidedJune 16, 1986

StatusPublished

This text of 121 A.D.2d 550 (TWA Carting Corp. v. Logrande) 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

TWA Carting Corp. v. Logrande, 121 A.D.2d 550, 503 N.Y.S.2d 540, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 58529 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Town Board of the Town of Islip dated November 20, 1984, which, after a hearing, found that the petitioner had violated Islip Town Code §§ 21-2 (C) and 21-2 (D) prohibiting the disposal of solid waste generated outside the Town of Islip in the town waste-disposal system and imposed a one-month suspension of its permit to collect solid waste.

Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, with costs.

The determination is supported by substantial evidence, and a one-month suspension is not shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see, Matter of Purdy v Kreisberg, 47 NY2d 354; Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222).

We have examined the petitioner’s further contentions and find them to be without merit. Mangano, J. P., Gibbons, Brown and Kooper, JJ., concur.

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

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Town Board of the Town of Islip dated November 20, 1984, which, after a hearing, found that the petitioner had violated Islip Town Code §§ 21-2 (C) and 21-2 (D) prohibiting the disposal of solid waste generated outside the Town of Islip in the town waste-disposal system and imposed a one-month suspension of its permit to collect solid waste.

Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, with costs.

The determination is supported by substantial evidence, and a one-month suspension is not shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see, Matter of Purdy v Kreisberg, 47 NY2d 354; Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222).

We have examined the petitioner’s further contentions and find them to be without merit. Mangano, J. P., Gibbons, Brown and Kooper, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

121 A.D.2d 550, 503 N.Y.S.2d 540, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 58529, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/twa-carting-corp-v-logrande-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack