Case law

Currie v. New York State Board of Parole

298 A.D.2d 805 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 31, 2002

Fahim v Lacy, 266 AD2d 612 , lv denied 94 NY2d 759 ). … Although petitioner denied making such a statement, it was for the Administrative Law Judge to assess credibility (see Matter of Kravetz v New York State Div. of Parole, 293 AD2d 843 ).

Board of Education v. Statewide Vending Corp.

84 A.D.2d 754 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 9, 1981

Although the language used by the school district in its bid award notice is *756 more in keeping with language employed in conditions precedent (see Boro Motors Corp. v Century Motor Sales Corp., 18 Misc 2d 1009 ), the conduct … (See Levi v Power Conversion, 47 AD2d 543 .) Mangano, J. P., Gibbons, Cohalan and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

Cicio v. Board of Zoning Appeals

13 A.D.3d 444 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 13, 2004

The Zoning Board’s determination was rationally based, upon its balancing of the factors set forth in Town Law § 267-b (3) (b), and is supported by substantial evidence (see Matter of Ifrah v Utschig, 98 NY2d 304 [2002]; … Matter of Sasso v Osgood, 86 NY2d 374 , 384 n 2 [1995]; Matter of DeJosia v Trotta, 11 AD3d 534 [2004]; Matter of Inlet Homes Corp. v Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Town of Hempstead, 304 AD2d 758 [2003], affd 2 NY3d 769 [2004]

Rotterdam Ventures, Inc. v. Town Board of Rotterdam

90 A.D.3d 1360 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 22, 2011

SYNC then applied to respondent Town Board of the Town of Rotterdam (hereinafter Board) to rezone the property from industrial to residential and amend the Town’s comprehensive zoning plan accordingly. … Thus, contrary to petitioner’s claim, the Board considered the impact of SYNC’s actions “likely to be undertaken as a result” of the rezoning (17 NYCRR 15.11 [b] [2]; see Matter of Defreestville Area Neighborhoods Assn. v

Bennett v. Board of Elections of Dutchess

264 A.D.2d 451 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 18, 1999

Ordered that the judgment is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the application is granted in its entirety, and the Board of Elections of the County of Dutchess is directed to remove … Gumbs, 207 AD2d 512 ; see also, Matter of Haas v Costigan, 14 AD2d 809 ).

Manshul Construction Corp. v. Board of Education

154 A.D.2d 38 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 20, 1990

(See generally, *42 Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222 , 231; Siegel, NY Prac § 561, at 784-787.) … Corp. v Atlas, 40 NY2d 652, 653 .)

Community Planning Board No. 18 v. Introne

84 A.D.2d 564 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 19, 1981

establish within the board’s jurisdiction two community residences for the mentally retarded. … Introne, 81 AD2d 890 ; Town of Hempstead v Commissioner of State of N.

James v. New York State Board of Parole

15 A.D.3d 774 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 17, 2005

To the extent that petitioner’s motion may be characterized as a motion to reargue, no appeal lies from the denial thereof (see Matter of Johnson v Coombe, 236 AD2d 669 [1997]).

Claim of Daly v. Board of Elections

254 A.D. 914 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 22, 1938

Appeal from an award of the State Industrial Board of compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Law. Claimant was an employee in the office of the board of elections of the city of New York. … The board of elections of the city of New York is a State agency. (,Matter of Reynolds, 202 N. Y. 430, 441 ; Schieffelin v. Komfort, 212 id. 520 .) Award affirmed, with costs to the State Industrial Board. Hill, P.

Pugh v. New York State Board of Parole

19 A.D.3d 991 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 30, 2005

Under the circumstances here, the Board’s broad discretion to rescind parole (see Matter of De Zimm v New York State Bd. of Parole, 135 AD2d 66, 69 [1988]) was limited only by the requirement that there be substantial evidence … Thus, upon our review of the record, we find the Board’s determination to be supported by substantial evidence of significant information that had not previously been before it (see Matter of Rizo v New York State Bd. of

Occhipinti v. Westchester County Board of Elections

49 A.D.3d 674 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Mar 14, 2008

Matter of Powers v New York State Bd. of Elections, 122 AD2d 970, 972 [1986]; Matter of Martin v Tutunjian, 89 AD2d 1034 [1982]). … Matter of Levine v Turco, 43 AD3d 618, 619 [2007]; Matter of D’Alvia v DiGiacomo, 175 AD2d 891, 892 [1991]; Matter of Davis v Dutchess County Bd. of Elections, 153 AD2d 716, 717 [1989]).

Mohan v. Zoning Board of Appeals

1 A.D.2d 364 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Nov 3, 2003

of the subject property had a rational basis and is supported by substantial evidence {see Matter of Marx v Humenik, 302 AD2d 528 [2003]; Matter of Mc-Quade v Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Town of Huntington, 248 AD2d 386 [1998 … Accordingly, the Board’s determination was properly upheld by the Supreme Court {see Matter of Ifrah v Utschig, 98 NY2d 304 [2002]). Santucci, J.E, Luciano, Schmidt and Adams, JJ., concur.

Board of Education v. Newburgh Teachers' Ass'n

146 A.D.2d 769 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jan 30, 1989

Faculty Assn., 140 AD2d 526 ), it is also true that procedural rights can be bargained for or arbitrated (see, Matter of Cohoes City School Dist. v Cohoes Teachers Assn., 40 NY2d 774 ; Matter of Board of Educ. v Yonkers Fedn … Such procedural disputes are proper subjects for arbitration (see, Matter of Board of Educ. v Yonkers Fedn. of Teachers, supra). Lawrence, J. P., Eiber, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.

Plochocki v. Onondaga County Board of Elections

21 A.D.3d 710 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 18, 2005

It is undisputed that petitioner received adequate and timely notice of the objector’s identity, and thus his failure to name the objector as a party renders this proceeding defective (see Matter of Gadsen v Board of Elections … of City of N.Y., 57 NY2d 751 [1982]; Matter of Wein v Molinari, 51 NY2d 717, 718-719 [1980]; Matter of Giorgi v Monroe County Bd. of Elections, *711 198 AD2d 886 [1993]).

People ex rel. Kaufman v. Board of Education

166 A.D. 58 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Feb 5, 1915

The board of education has power to abolish unnecessary positions. (People ex rel. Connolly v. Board of Education, 114 App. Div. 1 ; affd., 187 N. Y. 535 .) In People ex rel. Vineing v. Hayes ( 135 App. … Vineing v. Hayes, supra, 22 .) We place no weight whatever on the argument that the board had no power to act through its regular committee.

Rosenberg v. New York State Board of Regents

2 A.D.3d 1003 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Dec 11, 2003

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge respondent Commissioner of Education’s order implementing respondent Board of Regents’ determination denying petitioner’s most recent application for restoration … v Wing, 246 AD2d 813, 814 [1998]).

Araneo v. Town Board for Town of Clarkstown

55 A.D.3d 516 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Oct 7, 2008

—Commissioner of Labor], 38 AD3d at 1083 ; Bhanti v Brookhaven Mem. Hosp. Med. Ctr., 260 AD2d 334, 335 [1999]). … Inc.— *519 Commissioner of Labor], 38 AD3d 1082 [2007]; Shah v Lokhandwala, 265 AD2d 396, 397 [1999]).

Harden v. New York State Board of Parole

103 A.D.2d 777 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jul 9, 1984

Further, discretionary decisions of the Board of Parole are deemed to be judicial functions and are not reviewable “if done in accordance with law” (see Executive Law, § 259-i, subd 5; Matter of Bacon v Hammock, supra; Matter … of Briguglio v New York State Bd. of Parole, 24 NY2d 21 ; Matter of Abrams v New York State Bd. of Parole, 88 AD2d 951 ; Matter of Shapiro v Hammock, supra).

Dixler v. Orange County Board of Elections

112 A.D.2d 1075 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Aug 22, 1985

Special Term had jurisdiction to rule in this proceeding because the Board of Elections was timely served and the objectors before the Board of Elections were thereafter added as parties to the action. … Setting forth the office which a candidate seeks is a substantive requirement of a designating petition and no deviation' from the statutorily prescribed content is permitted (Matter of Ryan v Board of Elections, 53 NY2d

Route 300 Corp. v. Brown

19 A.D.2d 624 · Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · Jun 3, 1963

Hence, the defendants cannot be heard to complain of such nonperformance (Wagner V. Dereclctor, 306 N. Y. 386, 391 ; Imperator Realty Go. v. Tull, 228 N. Y. 447, 457 ). … Brown, 162 Mise. 412, 415; 3 Carmody-Wait, New York Practice, p. 575). Ughetta, Acting P. J., Christ, Brennan, Hill and Hopkins, JJ., concur.