Opinion
November 18, 1985
Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, with costs.
The core of respondent's direct case at the hearing was the testimony of its auto body repair inspector who had examined the car in question after petitioner had supposedly completed repair work upon it. His personal observation of poor and unworkmanlike repairs to the car chassis and trunk floor and testimony that certain repairs which petitioner had contracted to perform were not done at all was sufficient to constitute substantial evidence in support of the Commissioner's determination (see, e.g., 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176). Nor was the penalty imposed shocking to the conscience (see, e.g., Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 N.Y.2d 222).
We have examined petitioner's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mollen, P.J., Thompson, Brown and Lawrence, JJ., concur.