From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of O'Hara v. Brown

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 27, 1993
193 A.D.2d 564 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

May 27, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County [Edith Miller, J.].


Contrary to petitioner's claim the determination is supported by substantial evidence (300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176). It is for the administrative agency, not the court, to resolve issues of credibility (see, Matter of Berenhaus v Ward, 70 N.Y.2d 436, 443-444). The petitioner's due process rights were not violated by the admission of the second eyewitness' testimony as related by Sergeant Jensen, who interviewed him over the phone. Hearsay statements are admissible and may constitute substantial evidence at administrative proceedings. (People ex rel. Vega v Smith, 66 N.Y.2d 130.) We have considered petitioner's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Carro, Ellerin and Wallach, JJ.


Summaries of

Matter of O'Hara v. Brown

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 27, 1993
193 A.D.2d 564 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

Matter of O'Hara v. Brown

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of EUGENE W. O'HARA, Petitioner, v. LEE P. BROWN, as Police…

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

Date published: May 27, 1993

Citations

193 A.D.2d 564 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
598 N.Y.S.2d 207

Citing Cases

Sarantis v. Tisch

And they confirm petitioner's claim that Swain told him to get as much evidence as possible about the…

MATTER OF HARRIS v. NEW YORK CITY HOUS. AUTH.

Petitioner argues that a new hearing should be ordered inasmuch as the procedures by which petitioner's…