Weiss v. Board of Regents

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Weiss v. Board of Regents

24 A.D.2d 1038, 265 N.Y.S.2d 314, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2753

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

DecidedDecember 20, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 24 A.D.2d 1038 (Weiss v. Board of Regents) 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

Weiss v. Board of Regents, 24 A.D.2d 1038, 265 N.Y.S.2d 314, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2753 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Aulisi, J.

Proceeding under article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules to review the determination of the Board of Regents which revoked the petitioner’s license to practice medicine pursuant to the permissive provisions of section 6514 (subd. 2, par. [b]) of the Education Law. The petitioner was found guilty of the crime of publishing advertisements relating to certain diseases in violation of section 1142-a of the Penal Law in the Court of Special Sessions, New York County (affd. 18 A D 2d 1137, affd. 13 N Y 2d 1052, remittitur amd. 14 N Y 2d 583, cert. den. 377 U. S. 966). The information charged that, on September 11, 1960 and April 2, 1961 defendant “ unlawfully caused to be published, delivered and distributed in the newspaper La Prensa an advertisement that he was a practicing physician and would be willing to treat male patients for lost vitality and lost manhood.” Petitioner’s principal contention in this proceeding is that the punishment imposed is excessive and disproportionate to the offense that he committed. Here the petitioner had previously experienced a six months’ suspension of his license when in 1954 he advertised for patronage in a New York Spanish language weekly magazine (affd. 284 App. Div. 1005, app. dsmd. 308 N. Y. 810). We find that there was no abuse of discretion by the Board of Regents and that the punishment was not excessive. Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Taylor and Hamm, JJ., concur.

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

Aulisi, J.

Proceeding under article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules to review the determination of the Board of Regents which revoked the petitioner’s license to practice medicine pursuant to the permissive provisions of section 6514 (subd. 2, par. [b]) of the Education Law. The petitioner was found guilty of the crime of publishing advertisements relating to certain diseases in violation of section 1142-a of the Penal Law in the Court of Special Sessions, New York County (affd. 18 A D 2d 1137, affd. 13 N Y 2d 1052, remittitur amd. 14 N Y 2d 583, cert. den. 377 U. S. 966). The information charged that, on September 11, 1960 and April 2, 1961 defendant “ unlawfully caused to be published, delivered and distributed in the newspaper La Prensa an advertisement that he was a practicing physician and would be willing to treat male patients for lost vitality and lost manhood.” Petitioner’s principal contention in this proceeding is that the punishment imposed is excessive and disproportionate to the offense that he committed. Here the petitioner had previously experienced a six months’ suspension of his license when in 1954 he advertised for patronage in a New York Spanish language weekly magazine (affd. 284 App. Div. 1005, app. dsmd. 308 N. Y. 810). We find that there was no abuse of discretion by the Board of Regents and that the punishment was not excessive. Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Taylor and Hamm, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.2d 1038, 265 N.Y.S.2d 314, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2753, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weiss-v-board-of-regents-nyappdiv-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack