Opinion
2014-08-20
In the Matter of AFP HOLDING, INC., petitioner, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., respondents.
Kuznia Law, LLC, Elmhurst, N.Y. (David Kuznia and Alexander H. Yetwin of counsel), for petitioner. Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Kristin M. Helmers, Nicholas R. Ciappetta, and Victoria Scalzo of counsel), for respondents.
Kuznia Law, LLC, Elmhurst, N.Y. (David Kuznia and Alexander H. Yetwin of counsel), for petitioner.Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Kristin M. Helmers, Nicholas R. Ciappetta, and Victoria Scalzo of counsel), for respondents.
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Environmental Control Board of the City of New York, dated March 29, 2012, which confirmed a determination of an administrative law judge dated October 5, 2011, which, after a hearing, found that the petitioner violated Administrative Code of the City of New York § 28–105.1 by performing construction and/or repair work without a permit, and imposed a penalty in the sum of $1,600.
ADJUDGED that the determination dated March 29, 2012, is confirmed, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.
The determination of the Environmental Control Board of the City of New York confirming the administrative law judge's determination that the petitioner violated Administrative Code of the City of New York § 28–105.1 by performing construction and/or repair work without a permit was supported by substantial evidence and, as such, will not be disturbed ( see Administrative Code of City of N.Y. §§ 28–105.1; 28–105.4; 28–105.4.2; 28–105.4.2.1[8]; 48 RCNY 3–54 [a], [b]; see also Matter of E2CD, LLC v. Appeals Unit of NYC Envtl. Control Bd., 116 A.D.3d 773, 982 N.Y.S.2d 914;Matter of Konstas v. Environmental Control Bd. of City of N.Y., 104 A.D.3d 689, 690, 960 N.Y.S.2d 458;Matter of Aparicio v. Environmental Control Bd. of City of N.Y., 83 A.D.3d 1054, 1055, 921 N.Y.S.2d 571;see generally Matter of Wagner v. Fiala, 113 A.D.3d 694, 695, 978 N.Y.S.2d 699;Matter of R.I., Inc. v. New York State Dept. of Labor, 72 A.D.3d 1098, 1098–1099, 900 N.Y.S.2d 124).
The petitioner's remaining contentions are without merit. BALKIN, J.P., LEVENTHAL, MALTESE and LaSALLE, JJ., concur.