Majority
Memorandum: Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking to annul the determination revoking petitioner’s license to operate a group family daycare home. Contrary to petitioner’s contention, the determination is supported by substantial evidence (see generally 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176 , 181-182 [1978]). The hearsay evidence presented by respondent was admissible in this administrative proceeding, and it was sufficiently relevant and probative to constitute substantial evidence (see Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741 , 742 [1988]; People ex rel. Vega v Smith, 66 NY2d 130 , 139 [1985]; see also Matter of BiCounty Brokerage S. Corp. v State of N.Y. Ins. Dept., 4 AD3d 470 [2004]). We further conclude that the penalty is not “so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness” (Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 NY2d 222 , 237 [1974]; see Matter of Kelly v Safir, 96 NY2d 32 , 38 [2001], rearg denied 96 NY2d 854 [2001]). Present—Scudder, P.J., Centra, Lunn, Fahey and Green, JJ.
Cases cited
- 300 Gramatan Avenue Associates v. State Division of Human Rights 45 NY2d 176 at 181-182 p. 1295
- People ex rel. Vega v. Smith 66 NY2d 130 at 139 p. 1295
- BiCounty Brokerage South Corp. v. State of New York Insurance Department 4 AD3d 470 p. 1295
- Pell v. Board of Education 34 NY2d 222 at 237 p. 1295
- Kelly v. Safir 96 NY2d 32 at 38 p. 1295