From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Silberspitz v. Sobol

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 7, 1994
206 A.D.2d 582 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

July 7, 1994


Petitioner was found guilty of professional misconduct based on his conviction of submitting false claims to the Medicaid program. As a result his license was revoked and he was ordered to pay a fine of $10,000. He urges as a basis for annulment that the punishment imposed is so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to this Court's sense of fairness. We disagree. The fact that others found guilty of similar transgressions may have received lighter sanctions does not automatically justify a modification. Given the facts of this case and the record before us, we see no reason to disturb the penalty imposed. Petitioner's remaining arguments have been considered and rejected as unpersuasive.

Mikoll, J.P., Mercure, Crew III, Weiss and Yesawich Jr., JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.


Summaries of

Matter of Silberspitz v. Sobol

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 7, 1994
206 A.D.2d 582 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Matter of Silberspitz v. Sobol

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ARTHUR SILBERSPITZ, Petitioner, v. THOMAS SOBOL…

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

Date published: Jul 7, 1994

Citations

206 A.D.2d 582 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
615 N.Y.S.2d 1020

Citing Cases

Yohanan v. King

The penalty of revocation was not so disproportionate to the offense as to shock one's sense of fairness.…

Singla v. New York State Department of Health

Petitioner's contention that the revocation of his license was unfair, unduly harsh and without a rational…