Opinion
March 31, 1986
Determination and order confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, with costs.
A review of the record demonstrates that the hearing was fair and that the determination and order under review is supported by substantial evidence. The Administrative Law Judge clearly had the power to limit the petitioner's cross-examination of witnesses in order to avoid filling the record with irrelevant or unduly repetitious evidence (see, State Administrative Procedure Act § 306). As to the admission of a report prepared by one of the respondents' employees which contained a hearsay statement made by an anonymous informant, it is well settled that the technical rules of evidence need not be adhered to at an administrative hearing (cf. Matter of Maxfield v. Tofany, 34 A.D.2d 869). In any event, the Administrative Law Judge did not rely upon this statement in reaching his conclusions and therefore the outcome of the proceeding was not affected by this alleged error.
We do not find that the penalty assessed by the respondent commissioner was, under the circumstances, so disproportionate to the offenses as to shock one's sense of fairness (see, Matter of Pell v. Board of Educ., 34 N.Y.2d 222, 233). Mangano, J.P., Brown, Weinstein and Spatt, JJ., concur.