Opinion
December 12, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Irving Kirschenbaum, J.).
We find that the determination of the Hearing Officer was amply supported by the record (Matter of Stork Rest. v Boland, 282 N.Y. 256, 267; Matter of Wiener v Gabel, 18 A.D.2d 1025). Additionally, the penalty imposed by the administrative body will not be set aside by this court unless "`the measure of punishment or discipline imposed is so disproportionate to the offense, in the light of all the circumstances, as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness'" (Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 N.Y.2d 222, 233). We are unable to make such a finding in the instant case.
Finally, because the petitioner's misrepresentation resulted in an overpayment of subsidy, such money is subject to recoupment (New York City Hous. Auth. v Stern, 3 Misc.2d 1007; 42 U.S.C. § 1437).
Concur — Kupferman, J.P., Asch, Kassal, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.