Opinion
January 30, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lonschein, J.).
Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court properly found that the petitioner, a farrier, was entitled to a hearing before he could be excluded from the respondent's facilities on the ground that he had allegedly possessed a gun while on the premises (see, Matter of Saumell v New York Racing Assn., 58 N.Y.2d 231, mot to amend remittitur granted 69 N.Y.2d 705). The petitioner's due process rights were not infringed upon at the court-ordered hearing, by either the use of hearsay evidence, which was "sufficiently relevant and probative" to support the respondent's finding that the petitioner had possessed a gun on its property, or the failure of the respondent to produce its investigators for cross-examination (Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 N.Y.2d 741; see, People ex rel. Vega v Smith, 66 N.Y.2d 130; Matter of Saumell v New York Racing Assn., supra). Lawrence, J.P., Eiber, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.