From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Ingber v. Board of Regents of State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 14, 1980
74 A.D.2d 676 (N.Y. App. Div. 1980)

Opinion

February 14, 1980


Proceeding initiated in this court pursuant to subdivision 4 of section 6510 Educ. of the Education Law to annul a determination of the Commissioner of Education which revoked petitioner's license to practice as a chiropractor. In this proceeding the petitioner contends that he was dealt with unequally as compared to others in similar circumstances, all of whom received less severe punishment for similar violations. Petitioner also contends that the punishment was so disproportionate to his offenses as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness. Finally, the petitioner argues that the determination was based upon evidence not presented at the hearing and that certain hearsay statements were admitted, thereby depriving the petitioner of his opportunity for cross-examination. With respect to the discipline imposed upon the petitioner, the issue presented is whether the discipline is so severe as to be shocking to one's sense of justice. (Matter of Pell v. Board of Educ., 34 N.Y.2d 222; Matter of Kenna v Ambach, 61 A.D.2d 1091). The record reveals that the New York State Board of Chiropractic Committee on Professional Conduct and the Regents Review Committee considered all of the facts and circumstances of the matter. The determination that the petitioner's involvement was greater than that of his coconspirators is supported by substantial evidence and that others may have received lighter penalties does not warrant a modification in this proceeding (Matter of Raguseo v. Ambach, 67 A.D.2d 738). With respect to the extraneous evidence and hearsay statements, "it should be remembered that a hearing such as this is not governed by the technical rules of evidence" (Matter of Jay v. Board of Regents of Univ. of State of N.Y., 50 A.D.2d 967, 968). Furthermore, there is substantial evidence to support the determination absent any consideration of the evidence objected to (Matter of Gliwa v. Board of Regents, 58 A.D.2d 721). Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Sweeney, J.P., Main, Mikoll, Casey and Herlihy, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Ingber v. Board of Regents of State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 14, 1980
74 A.D.2d 676 (N.Y. App. Div. 1980)
Case details for

Matter of Ingber v. Board of Regents of State

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of JOSEPH H. INGBER, Petitioner, v. BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE…

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

Date published: Feb 14, 1980

Citations

74 A.D.2d 676 (N.Y. App. Div. 1980)