From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Berroa v. Fiala

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Nov 26, 2014
122 A.D.3d 1209 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)

Opinion

518330

11-26-2014

In the Matter of Fernando A. BERROA, Appellant, v. Barbara J. FIALA, as Commissioner of Motor Vehicles, Respondent.

James Kleinbaum, Chatham, for appellant. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York City (Matthew W. Grieco of counsel), for respondent.


James Kleinbaum, Chatham, for appellant.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York City (Matthew W. Grieco of counsel), for respondent.

Before: PETERS, P.J., STEIN, ROSE, EGAN JR. and CLARK, JJ.

Opinion

CLARK, J.Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Gilpatric, J.), entered October 25, 2013 in Albany County, which, among other things, dismissed petitioner's application, in a combined proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 and action for declaratory judgment, to review a determination of respondent denying petitioner's application for a driver's license.

Petitioner, who had committed 22 driving offenses between 2004 and 2011, had his driver's license revoked in 2011. In July 2012, petitioner applied for, and was denied, a reinstatement of his driver's license, a decision that was affirmed by the Administrative Appeals Board. Petitioner then commenced this hybrid CPLR article 78 proceeding and action for declaratory judgment, seeking annulment of the determination and an order either granting petitioner a driver's license or remitting and requiring review by respondent under the regulations existing at the time of petitioner's application rather than the revised regulations in place at the time of the denial. Supreme Court dismissed petitioner's application. Petitioner now appeals arguing that the court erred when it found that the application of 15 NYCRR former 136.5(a)(3) and (b)(2) was not based on an error of law, arbitrary and capricious, irrational or an abuse of discretion.

For the reasons set forth in Matter of Scism v. Fiala, 122 A.D.3d 1197, 997 N.Y.S.2d 798 [decided herewith], we affirm.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.

PETERS, P.J., STEIN, ROSE and EGAN JR., JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Berroa v. Fiala

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Nov 26, 2014
122 A.D.3d 1209 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
Case details for

Berroa v. Fiala

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of FERNANDO A. BERROA, Appellant, v. BARBARA J. FIALA, as…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Date published: Nov 26, 2014

Citations

122 A.D.3d 1209 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
997 N.Y.S.2d 808
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 8288

Citing Cases

Kenny v. Fiala

We affirm. Initially, two recent decisions from this Court effectively dispose of petitioner's primary…

Matsen v. N.Y. State Dep't of Motor Vehicles

). Turning to petitioner's justiciable claims, we have previously held that other, similar provisions of 15…