From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Weiner v. Lomenzo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 27, 1969
32 A.D.2d 634 (N.Y. App. Div. 1969)

Opinion

May 27, 1969


Determination, dated June 5, 1968, suspending real estate broker's license of petitioner Weiner and real estate salesmen's licenses of petitioners Bonello and Spitzer for six months, unanimously modified on the law and in the exercise of discretion to the extent of reducing the penalty to three months' suspension commencing from the date of the order to be entered herein, and, as so modified, confirmed, without costs or disbursements. The enforcement of the determination was stayed pending dispostion of the article 78 proceeding, which was transferred to this court pursuant to CPLR 7804 (subd. [g]). The determination finding petitioners guilty of untrustworthiness is supported by substantial evidence. However, in our opinion, under all the circumstances the sanctions imposed were excessive and unduly disproportionate to the offense. On the record before us, a suspension for a period of three months would be more appropriate. ( Ancis v. Lomenzo, 31 A.D.2d 615.)

Concur — McGivern, J.P., Markewich, McNally and Bastow, JJ.


Summaries of

Matter of Weiner v. Lomenzo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 27, 1969
32 A.D.2d 634 (N.Y. App. Div. 1969)
Case details for

Matter of Weiner v. Lomenzo

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ARTHUR WEINER et al., Petitioners, v. JOHN P. LOMENZO, as…

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

Date published: May 27, 1969

Citations

32 A.D.2d 634 (N.Y. App. Div. 1969)
300 N.Y.S.2d 661

Citing Cases

Lind v. Lomenzo

On the record before us, a suspension for the period of one year would be more appropriate, and at that time,…

Bernard-Charles, Inc. v. Cuomo

But because petitioners, who have been engaged in business since 1958, are first offenders, and the offense…