Willets Point Contracting Corp. v. Department of Motor Vehicles

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Willets Point Contracting Corp. v. Department of Motor Vehicles

227 A.D.2d 411, 642 N.Y.S.2d 63, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4870

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 6, 1996·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Department of Motor Vehicles of the State of New York, dated September 8, 1993, which, after a hearing, found that the petitioner violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 385 (9), and imposed a fine.

Adjudged that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

The respondent’s determination that the petitioner violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 385 (9) is supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of R & D Equip. Leasing Co. v Adduci, 220 AD2d 900; People v Vinciguerra, 24 Misc 2d 63; People v Fortino, 14 Misc 2d 725). The petitioner’s contention that the respondent failed to prove that the petitioner knowingly permitted its vehicle to exceed the weight limitations of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 385 (9) may not be raised for the first time in this proceeding (see, Matter of Malkin v Tully, 65 AD2d 228; see also, Aldrich v Pattison, 107 AD2d 258). Finally, the fine imposed by the respondent was not excessive (see, Vehicle and Traffic Law § 385 [19] [d]). O’Brien, J.. P., Ritter, Pizzuto and Altman, 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 Department of Motor Vehicles of the State of New York, dated September 8, 1993, which, after a hearing, found that the petitioner violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 385 (9), and imposed a fine.

Adjudged that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

The respondent’s determination that the petitioner violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 385 (9) is supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of R & D Equip. Leasing Co. v Adduci, 220 AD2d 900; People v Vinciguerra, 24 Misc 2d 63; People v Fortino, 14 Misc 2d 725). The petitioner’s contention that the respondent failed to prove that the petitioner knowingly permitted its vehicle to exceed the weight limitations of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 385 (9) may not be raised for the first time in this proceeding (see, Matter of Malkin v Tully, 65 AD2d 228; see also, Aldrich v Pattison, 107 AD2d 258). Finally, the fine imposed by the respondent was not excessive (see, Vehicle and Traffic Law § 385 [19] [d]). O’Brien, J.. P., Ritter, Pizzuto and Altman, JJ., concur.

Willets Point Contracting Corp. v. Department of Motor Vehicles, 227 A.D.2d 411, 642 N.Y.S.2d 63, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4870 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

227 A.D.2d 411 (Willets Point Contracting Corp. v. Department of Motor Vehicles) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related