Bernstein v. Police Dept. of City of New York
| Citation | 445 N.Y.S.2d 716,85 A.D.2d 574 |
| Parties | In re Application of Jeff BERNSTEIN, Petitioner-Respondent, For a Judgment etc., v. POLICE DEPARTMENT OF the CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Respondents-Appellants. |
| Decision Date | 22 December 1981 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
Bernstein, pro se.
J. E. Handler, New York City, for respondent-appellant.
Before SULLIVAN, J. P., and ROSS, MARKEWICH, LUPIANO and SILVERMAN, JJ.
Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Callahan, J.), entered December 2, 1980, which annulled respondent's determination denying petitioner's application for a license to carry a concealed pistol and directed the issuance of said license, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the petition dismissed.
The burden of establishing "proper cause" for the issuance of a full-carry permit (see Penal Law § 400.00is on the applicant. (Hochreich v. Codd, 68 A.D.2d 424, 426, 417 N.Y.S.2d 498; Archibald v. Codd, 59 A.D.2d 867, 399 N.Y.S.2d 235.) The responsibility for determining whether an applicant has demonstrated proper cause is entrusted to the discretion of the licensing official (Hochreich v. Codd, supra) whose administrative determination should not be disturbed unless it is arbitrary or capricious (Matter of Sullivan Co. Harness Racing Assn. v. Glasser, 30 N.Y.2d 269, 332 N.Y.S.2d 622, 283 N.E.2d 603).
On this record it is clear that respondent's determination to deny, on the basis of insufficient need, petitioner's application for a permit to carry a concealed pistol on his person was neither arbitrary nor capricious. Petitioner, a 39 year old attorney, specializing in criminal and matrimonial law and whose practice is such that he must often carry large amounts of cash in areas "noted for criminal activity", failed to "demonstrate a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community or of persons engaged in the same profession." (Matter of Klenosky v. New York City Police Dept., 75 A.D.2d 793, 428 N.Y.S.2d 256, aff'd 53 N.Y.2d 685, 439 N.Y.S.2d 108, 421 N.E.2d 503.)
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kachalsky v. Cnty. of Westchester
...property does not constitute ‘proper cause.’ ” In re O'Connor, 585 N.Y.S.2d at 1003 (citing Bernstein v. Police Dep't of City of New York, 85 A.D.2d 574, 574, 445 N.Y.S.2d 716 (1st Dep't 1981)). Good moral character plus a simple desire to carry a weapon is not enough. Moore v. Gallup, 293 ......
-
N.Y.S. Rifle & Pistol Ass'n, Inc. v. Bruen
...is demanding. For example, living or working in an area " ‘noted for criminal activity’ " does not suffice. In re Bernstein , 85 App.Div.2d 574, 445 N.Y.S.2d 716, 717 (1981). Rather, New York courts generally require evidence "of particular threats, attacks or other extraordinary danger to ......
-
Kachalsky v. Cnty. of Westchester
...person and property does not constitute 'proper cause.'" In re O'Connor, 585 N.Y.S.2d at 1003 (citing Bernstein v. Police Dep't of City of New York, 85 A.D.2d 574, 574 (1st Dep't 1981)). Good moral character plus a simple desire to carry a weapon is not enough. Moore v. Gallup, 293 N.Y. 846......
-
Blatt v. New York City Housing Authority
...of discretion by the municipal authorities (see, Sable v. McGuire, 92 A.D.2d 805, 460 N.Y.S.2d 52; Matter of Bernstein v. Police Dept. of City of N.Y., 85 A.D.2d 574, 445 N.Y.S.2d 716) to which governmental immunity attaches (see, Tango v. Tulevech, 61 N.Y.2d 34, 471 N.Y.S.2d 73, 459 N.E.2d......