Zinman v. Ambach

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Zinman v. Ambach

60 A.D.2d 731, 401 N.Y.S.2d 307, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14766

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

DecidedDecember 29, 1977

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 60 A.D.2d 731 (Zinman v. Ambach) 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

Zinman v. Ambach, 60 A.D.2d 731, 401 N.Y.S.2d 307, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14766 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding initiated in this court pursuant to subdivision 4 of section 6510 of the Education Law to annul a determination of the Commissioner of Education suspending petitioner’s license to practice podiatry. The petitioner alleges in his brief as follows: "Petitioner does not dispute that he was convicted of a crime within the meaning of Section 6509(5)(b) of the Education Law nor that his admission of having committed the acts constituting such crime represents unprofessional conduct within the meaning of Section 6509(9) of the Education Law. However, Petitioner contends that the measure of discipline imposed by the Commissioner is so shocking to one’s sense of justice as to warrant this Court annulling the Commissioner’s judgment.” The record does not establish that the discipline imposed was unwarranted (see Matter of Gliwa v Board of Regents, 58 AD2d 721, mot for lv to app den 43 NY2d 644) and, accordingly, this court may not interfere with the punishment (Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222). Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Sweeney, J. P., Kane, Mahoney, Larkin and Herlihy, JJ., concur.

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

Proceeding initiated in this court pursuant to subdivision 4 of section 6510 of the Education Law to annul a determination of the Commissioner of Education suspending petitioner’s license to practice podiatry. The petitioner alleges in his brief as follows: "Petitioner does not dispute that he was convicted of a crime within the meaning of Section 6509(5)(b) of the Education Law nor that his admission of having committed the acts constituting such crime represents unprofessional conduct within the meaning of Section 6509(9) of the Education Law. However, Petitioner contends that the measure of discipline imposed by the Commissioner is so shocking to one’s sense of justice as to warrant this Court annulling the Commissioner’s judgment.” The record does not establish that the discipline imposed was unwarranted (see Matter of Gliwa v Board of Regents, 58 AD2d 721, mot for lv to app den 43 NY2d 644) and, accordingly, this court may not interfere with the punishment (Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222). Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Sweeney, J. P., Kane, Mahoney, Larkin and Herlihy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

60 A.D.2d 731, 401 N.Y.S.2d 307, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14766, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zinman-v-ambach-nyappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack