Opinion
June 1, 1987
Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.
Based upon a review of the record, we find that the respondent's determination is supported by substantial evidence in the record. Accordingly, the determination under review will not be disturbed (see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 N.Y.2d 222; Matter of Peill v Board of Educ., 129 A.D.2d 799).
We note that the petitioner's claim that hearsay evidence was improperly received or relied upon by the Hearing Officer is devoid of merit. As set forth by the Court of Appeals, "we no longer follow the `legal residuum rule', under which at least some minimum quantity of the evidence which supported an administrative decision had to be of a kind admissible in a court proceeding" (Matter of Eagle v Paterson, 57 N.Y.2d 831, 833, quoting from 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176, 180, n).
Nor does the record support the petitioner's allegation of a potential conflict of interest caused by the fact that, after the hearing but prior to the filing of this petition, the petitioner's original attorney joined the law firm of his former adversary, the Deputy Town Attorney. The record belies any contention that the petitioner was in any way prejudiced during the hearing. Thompson, J.P., Lawrence, Weinstein and Harwood, JJ., concur.