From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Jones v. Fletcher

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
May 7, 1952
279 App. Div. 1118 (N.Y. App. Div. 1952)

Opinion

May 7, 1952.

Present — Foster, P.J., Heffernan, Brewster, Bergan and Coon, JJ.


Proceeding under article 78 of the Civil Practice Act, to review a determination of the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles. The petitioner's operator's license has been revoked and his registration has been suspended by the respondent commissioner. The suspension is made pending compliance with the financial responsibility provisions of the statute following conviction for a traffic infraction. The revocation flows from an accident at Oneida April 23, 1951, in which petitioner's motor vehicle was involved. Following this accident, while fully advised by counsel, petitioner pleaded guilty in the City Court to a violation of subdivision 1 of section 56 Veh. Traf. of the Vehicle and Traffic Law for speeding under that subdivision. At the hearing there was proof before the motor vehicle referee of undue speed by petitioner's car at the scene of the accident, which the commissioner could have accepted as credible; and besides this there was the judicial admission of the fact by petitioner's plea of guilty on the traffic charge in court. These together provide a substantial evidentiary base for the commissioner's determination and that is as far as the court may carry the inquiry on the proceeding. Order unanimously confirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Matter of Jones v. Fletcher

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
May 7, 1952
279 App. Div. 1118 (N.Y. App. Div. 1952)
Case details for

Matter of Jones v. Fletcher

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of WILLIAM F. JONES, Petitioner, against CLIFFORD J…

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

Date published: May 7, 1952

Citations

279 App. Div. 1118 (N.Y. App. Div. 1952)

Citing Cases

Muladzhanov v. City of New York

This court does not consider respondents' arguments with respect to the 2017 speed camera Notices of…

Matter of Zimmerman v. Kelly

The court after examining the evidence came to the conclusion that it was not sufficiently substantial to…