Opinion
April 16, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Fern Fisher-Brandveen, J.).
Assuming that petitioners effectively exhausted their administrative remedies ( see, Matter of Seidner v. Town of Colonie, Bd. of Zoning Appeals, 79 A.D.2d 751, affd 55 N.Y.2d 613; Matter of Cotroneo v. Klein, 62 A.D.2d 493, 496), we affirm the appealed order dismissing the within article 78 proceeding upon the merits. Petitioners were given ample notice by respondent of the charges against them and of the hearing upon those charges, all in accordance with respondent's constitution and bylaws. The hearing evidence adduced against petitioners showed that they had attempted to oust two officers of respondent club through litigation, defamatory allegations and innuendo later conceded by petitioners to be baseless. We note in this connection that petitioner Nyitray's Federal defamation action against a member of the respondent club was recently dismissed, on grounds, inter alia, that the allegations contained in a letter submitted to the respondent's Board, which formed the basis of respondent's charges against petitioners, were "substantially true" ( Nyitray v. Johnson, 1998 U.S. Dist. Lexis 1791, * 28 [SD NY, Feb. 18, 1998, Mukasey, J.]). Accordingly, since there was plainly a rational basis for the challenged determination of respondent, a private, voluntary membership corporation ( see, People ex rel. Holmstrom v. Independent Dock Builders' Benevolent Union, 164 App. Div. 267, 270), there exists no ground upon which we might set it aside. We have considered petitioners' remaining arguments and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Rubin, Williams, Tom and Saxe, JJ.