Stamosv.Appeals Bd. of Yonkers Parking Violations Bureau

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.Mar 23, 2016
26 N.Y.S.3d 881 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)
26 N.Y.S.3d 881137 A.D.3d 1152

03-23-2016

In the Matter of Antonios STAMOS, petitioner, v. APPEALS BOARD OF YONKERS PARKING VIOLATIONS BUREAU, respondent.

Antonios Stamos, Yonkers, N.Y., petitioner pro se. Michael V. Curti, Corporation Counsel, Yonkers, N.Y. (Gregory Spicer, Hina Sherwani, and Matthew I. Gallagher of counsel), for respondent.


Antonios Stamos, Yonkers, N.Y., petitioner pro se.

Michael V. Curti, Corporation Counsel, Yonkers, N.Y. (Gregory Spicer, Hina Sherwani, and Matthew I. Gallagher of counsel), for respondent.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Appeals Board of the Yonkers Parking Violations Bureau dated October 29, 2014, affirming a determination of an administrative law judge dated May 21, 2014, which, after a hearing, found that the petitioner violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 306(b), and imposed a penalty.

ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.

Judicial review of an administrative determination made after a hearing at which evidence was taken is limited to whether the determination is supported by substantial evidence based upon the entire record (see CPLR 7803[4] ; Matter of Snitow v. New York State Dept. of Motor Vehs., 121 A.D.3d 1008, 996 N.Y.S.2d 55 ). Substantial evidence is "such relevant proof as a reasonable mind may accept as adequate to support a conclusion or ultimate fact" (300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v. State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176, 180, 408 N.Y.S.2d 54, 379 N.E.2d 1183 ).

Here, substantial evidence supports the determination that the petitioner violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 306(b) (see Matter of Milord v. New York State Dept. of Motor Vehs., 125 A.D.3d 972, 1 N.Y.S.3d 854 ).

RIVERA, J.P., BALKIN, COHEN and BARROS, JJ., concur.