Opinion
April 20, 1998
Adjudged that the petition is granted, without costs or disbursements, and the determination is annulled.
The petitioner was charged with operating an uninsured motor vehicle in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 319. At the hearing before an Administrative Law Judge, the petitioner explained that he had leased the vehicle and that he believed that he had received insurance along with the lease. However, the petitioner could not produce proof of insurance. The Administrative Law Judge determined that the charge of operating a vehicle without insurance had been established and the Department of Motor Vehicles Appeals Board sustained that determination.
We agree with the petitioner that his violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 319 was not supported by substantial evidence ( see, CPLR 7803). This statute requires the People to prove that a nonowner operator had actual knowledge of the lack of insurance ( see, People v. Abney, 176 A.D.2d 1193; People v. Hakimi-Fard, 137 Misc.2d 116, 119). There was no proof presented at the hearing to demonstrate that the petitioner knew that the vehicle was uninsured. Accordingly, the determination must be annulled.
Bracken, J.P., Copertino, Santucci, Florio and McGinity, JJ., concur.