Opinion
October 29, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (David Saxe, J.).
The agency determinations of non-responsibility were rationally based, since there was evidence that petitioner and its principal had engaged in a bid-rigging scheme on prior contracts, and that petitioner's principal misrepresented on various documents his involvement with other undisputed bid-riggers and his criminal record, all of which demonstrated poor judgment and a lack of integrity ( see, Matter of Brereton Assocs. v. Regan, 94 A.D.2d 886, 887, affd 60 N.Y.2d 807; Matter of Tully Constr. Co. v. Hevesi, 214 A.D.2d 465, appeal withdrawn 87 N.Y.2d 969). The non-responsibility determination, which was made only after petitioner, through its principals and attorney, was afforded an opportunity to present their arguments in person and in writing, and was reviewed in three levels of agency appeal, did not deprive petitioner of any due process rights and we reject petitioner's claim that the instant agency determination, when coupled with a prior similar determination, amounted to de facto debarment ( Matter of Callanan Indus. v. White, 118 A.D.2d 167, 170-171, lv denied 69 N.Y.2d 601; see also, Matter of Mid-State Indus. v. City of Cohoes, 221 A.D.2d 705, 706-707).
Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.