Klenosky v. New York City Police Dept.
| Decision Date | 29 May 1980 |
| Parties | In re Rudolph M. KLENOSKY, Petitioner-Respondent, v. The NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT et al., etc., Respondents-Appellants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Rudolph M. Klenosky, pro se.
J. E. Handler, New York City, for respondents-appellants.
Before FEIN, J. P., and SULLIVAN, LUPIANO, BLOOM and CARRO, JJ.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered July 25, 1979, which granted petition and directed respondents to issue a pistol carrying permit to petitioner, unanimously reversed, on the law, the application denied and the petition dismissed, without costs and disbursements.
On this record it is clear that the administrative determination denying petitioner's application for a pistol carrying permit (as distinct from an on-premises license) on the basis of failure to demonstrate "proper cause . . . for the issuance thereof" is supported by substantial evidence and is not arbitrary or capricious. Petitioner, a fifty-two year old attorney engaged in matrimonial and criminal law practice, did not sufficiently demonstrate a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community or of persons engaged in the same profession. The receipt of cash and checks (not in unusually high amounts) in the ordinary course of business for services rendered, which must be subsequently deposited in a bank, and threats from dissatisfied clients involved with the criminal law or threats related to the matrimonial practice, are not uncommon occurrences sufficient to distinguish petitioner from other attorneys engaged in similar practice. Further, petitioner's disability (an artificial right leg which necessitates walking with a limp) does not, of itself, amount to such an unusual circumstance as to warrant issuance of a permit to carry a concealed pistol. Finally, petitioner's professed fear of burglary in his home and office would be satisfied by issuance of an "on-premises" license, which type of license was in fact, offered to petitioner, but refused.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kachalsky v. Cacace
...Bratton, 238 A.D.2d 269, 656 N.Y.S.2d 626, 627 (1st Dep't 1997) (internal quotation marks omitted); Klenosky v. N.Y. City Police Dep't, 75 A.D.2d 793, 428 N.Y.S.2d 256, 257 (1st Dep't 1980), aff'd, 53 N.Y.2d 685, 439 N.Y.S.2d 108, 421 N.E.2d 503 (1981); see Bach v. Pataki, 408 F.3d 75, 80 (......
-
Bach v. Pataki
...profession." Williams v. Bratton, 238 A.D.2d 269, 270, 656 N.Y.S.2d 626 (1st Dep't 1997) (quoting Klenosky v. New York City Police Dep't, 75 A.D.2d 793, 428 N.Y.S.2d 256 (1st Dep't 1980), aff'd 53 N.Y.2d 685, 439 N.Y.S.2d 108, 421 N.E.2d 503 (1981)); see also Bando, 290 A.D.2d at 693, 735 N......
-
Kachalsky v. Cacace, 10-CV-5413 (CS)
...Williams v. Bratton, 656 N.Y.S.2d 626, 627 (1st Dep't 1997) (internal quotation marks omitted); Klenosky v. N.Y. City Police Dep't, 428 N.Y.S.2d 256, 257 (1st Dep't 1980), aff'd, 53 N.Y.2d 685 (1981); see Bach v. Pataki, 408 F.3d 75, 80 (2d Cir. 2005). The application process for licenses u......
-
Davis v. Grimes
...from that of the general community or of persons engaged in the same profession.” Id. (quoting Klenosky v. New York City Police Dep't, 75 A.D.2d 793, 428 N.Y.S.2d 256, 257 (1980), aff'd on op. below, 53 N.Y.2d 685, 439 N.Y.S.2d 108, 421 N.E.2d 503 (1981) ). Licensing officers are local judg......
-
Employer Considerations For Navigating Evolving Gun Laws
...federal law. Further Littler insights on this topic can be found here and here. Footnotes 1 E.g., In re Klenosky, 75 App. Div. 2d 793, 428 N. Y. S. 2d 256, 2 For example, the Town of Superior in Colorado had adopted a ban on certain categories of firearms, including assault weapons or large......
-
"THE TIMOROUS MAY STAY AT HOME": JUDGE CARDOZO'S PROPHECY IN CONTEMPORARY UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE.
...Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen. 142 S. Ct. 2111 (2022). (263) See id. at 2122. (264) See id. at 2122-23 (quoting In re Klenosky. 428 N.Y.S.2d 256, 257 (App. Div. (265) See Bruen, 142 S. Ct. at 2123 (citing O'Brien v. Keegan, 663 N.E.2d 316, 316-17 (NY. 1996); Babernitz v. Police Dep't of......
-
A First Amendment-inspired Approach to Heller's "schools" and "government Buildings"
...701 F.3d 81 (2d Cir. 2012), cert. denied, 133 S. Ct. 1806 (2013). 151. Id. at 86 (quoting Klenosky v. N.Y. City Police Dep't, 75 A.D.2d 793, 793 (1st Dep't 1980), aff'd on opinion below, 53 N.Y.2d 685 (1981)) (internal quotation marks 152. Kachalsky, 701 F.3d at 89. 153. Id. at 89 n.10. 154......
-
THE TERRITORIES UNDER TEXT, HISTORY, AND TRADITION.
...D.C.'s registration law ... does not satisfy [a] history- and tradition-based test...."). (30.) E.g., Klenosky v. N.Y.C. Police Dep't, 428 N.Y.S.2d 256, 257 (N.Y. App. Div. 1980), overruled in part by Bruen, 142 S. Ct. 2111 (construing the "proper cause" requirement to mean that a permit ap......