Opinion
2003-04370
Submitted October 2, 2003.
November 10, 2003.
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review so much of a determination of the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles dated November 15, 2001, as affirmed so much of a determination of an Administrative Law Judge of the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles, dated January 10, 2001, as, after a hearing, found that the petitioner violated New York City Traffic Rules and Regulations (34 RCNY) § 4-15(b)(9) and (10), and imposed a penalty.
Margolis Flanary, LLP, Garden City, N.Y. (Walker G. Flanary III of counsel), for petitioner.
Eliot Spitzer, Attorney-General, New York, N.Y. (Michael S. Belohlavek and Thomas B. Litsky of counsel; Meeta Anand on the brief), for respondent.
Before: NANCY E. SMITH, J.P., LEO F. McGINITY, HOWARD MILLER, REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
DECISION JUDGMENT
ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed insofar as reviewed, with costs, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits.
Judicial review of a determination rendered by an administrative body after a hearing is limited to whether the determination is supported by substantial evidence upon the entire record ( see 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v. State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176; Matter of Liuzzo v. State of New York Dept. of Motor Vehicles Appeals Bd., 209 A.D.2d 618). A reviewing court will not undertake the functions of weighing evidence and assessing credibility, as those issues are committed to the discretion of the Administrative Law Judge ( see Matter of Scara-Mix, Inc. v. Martinez, 305 A.D.2d 418).
The determination that the petitioner violated New York City Traffic Rules and Regulations (34 RCNY) § 4-15(b)(9) and (10) is supported by substantial evidence, and we decline to disturb it.
SMITH, J.P., McGINITY, H. MILLER and RIVERA, JJ., concur.