Opinion
June 4, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Myriam Altman, J.).
The complaint in the instant action was dismissed upon the ground that plaintiff was collaterally estopped from raising the issues asserted therein by virtue of a determination of the New York State Insurance Department, which had found plaintiff guilty of certain misconduct including the forging of policy holders' signatures. "The doctrine of collateral estoppel precludes a party from relitigating `an issue which has previously been decided against him in a proceeding in which he had a fair opportunity to fully litigate the point' [citations omitted]" (Kaufman v. Lilly Co., 65 N.Y.2d 449, 455), and is applicable to prior determinations made in an administrative forum (see, Ryan v. New York Tel. Co., 62 N.Y.2d 494).
The issue of defendant's conduct was fully litigated in that administrative proceeding. We note also that as a result of this misconduct defendant was fined and suspended by the National Association of Securities Dealers. The claim of subornation of perjury by defendant bears directly on the issue of the veracity of the witnesses which of necessity was determined by the administrative tribunal. Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that he did not have the opportunity to address the issue at the administrative hearing.
Under the circumstances presented by this record, the sanction imposed was warranted.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Carro, Milonas, Wallach and Smith, JJ.