From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Dziedzic v. Kelly

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Sep 27, 1988
143 A.D.2d 537 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Opinion

September 27, 1988

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Wyoming County, Dadd, J.

Present — Callahan, J.P., Doerr, Green, Pine and Davis, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Petitioner's primary argument on appeal is that his Tier III hearing was not commenced in a timely fashion. We find that since the seven-day period for commencing petitioner's hearing ( 7 NYCRR 251-5.1 [a]) ended on Veterans' Day, a public holiday, respondent's request for an extension of time and the commencement of the hearing on the next succeeding business day was timely (see, General Construction Law § 25-a; cf., People ex rel. Frost v Meloni, 124 A.D.2d 1032, lv denied 69 N.Y.2d 606; Matter of Picciano v Hammock, 92 A.D.2d 1043, 1044, lv denied 59 N.Y.2d 606). Petitioner's remaining argument regarding the penalty range for Tier III violations has no merit (see, Matter of Coleman v Kelly, 130 A.D.2d 976, affd 72 N.Y.2d 850).


Summaries of

Matter of Dziedzic v. Kelly

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Sep 27, 1988
143 A.D.2d 537 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)
Case details for

Matter of Dziedzic v. Kelly

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of JOHN DZIEDZIC, Appellant, v. WALTER J. KELLY, as…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Sep 27, 1988

Citations

143 A.D.2d 537 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Citing Cases

Matter of Persing v. Coughlin

General Construction Law § 25-a (1) provides, in part: "When any period of time, computed from a certain day,…

Matter of Maldonado v. Coughlin

Accordingly, the seven-day rule is inapplicable (see, Matter of Young v Coughlin, 144 A.D.2d 753; Matter of…