Opinion
February 19, 1985
Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, with costs.
There is substantial evidence in the record supporting the hearing officer's finding, which was subsequently adopted by the respondent State Liquor Authority, that petitioner refused to appear for an inquiry at the offices of the State Liquor Authority on two scheduled dates, in violation of New York State Liquor Authority Rules, rule 36 (1) (o) ( 9 NYCRR 53.1 [o]).
Further, the penalty imposed was not so disproportionate, under all the circumstances herein, as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness ( Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 N.Y.2d 222, 237).
We have considered the other contentions raised by petitioner and find them to be without merit. Titone, J.P., Thompson, O'Connor and Eiber, JJ., concur.