Legal Opinion
Amsterdam Garage v. Department of Consumer Affairs
New York Supreme Court
Decided April 14, 1988PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Martin Evans, J.
Petitioners, Amsterdam Garage Corporation, Consolidated Parking Corporation and Proud Parking Corporation (hereinafter petitioners), have commenced a CPLR article 78 proceeding against the respondents, the Department of Consumer Affairs of the City of New York and Angelo J. Aponte, as Commissioner of the Department (hereinafter Consumer Affairs), alleging that the administrative determination by Consumer Affairs is not supported by the evidence, is unreasonable, arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion and affected by errors of law and that general…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- 300 Gramatan Avenue Associates v. State Division of Human RightsNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
- United States v. BiswellSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Donovan v. DeweySupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Kovarsky v. Housing & Development AdministrationNew York Court of Appeals · 1972
- Golden v. Planning Board of RamapoNew York Court of Appeals · 1972
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- 400 East 54th Street Garage Corp. v. GreenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- Amsterdam Garage Corp. v. Department of Consumer AffairsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990