Klenosky v. New York City Police Dept.
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
| Writing for the Court | Before FEIN |
| Citation | 428 N.Y.S.2d 256,75 A.D.2d 793 |
| 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. |
Page 256
v.
The NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT et al., etc.,
Respondents-Appellants.
Page 257
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.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
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...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kachalsky v. Cacace, No. 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......
-
Kachalsky v. Cnty. of Westchester, Docket Nos. 11–3642 (Lead), 11–3962(XAP).
...distinguishable from that of the general community or of persons engaged in the same profession.” Klenosky v. N.Y City Police Dep't, 75 A.D.2d 793, 793, 428 N.Y.S.2d 256 (1st Dep't 1980), aff'd on op. below,53 N.Y.2d 685, 439 N.Y.S.2d 108, 421 N.E.2d 503 (1981). There is a substantial body ......
-
Christopher Davis, William P. Thompson, Wilson Lobao, Robert Capone, & Commonwealth Second Amendment, Inc. v. Grimes, Civil No. 13–10246–FDS.
...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 judge......
-
Davis v. Grimes, Civil No. 13–10246–FDS.
...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......
-
Kachalsky v. Cacace, No. 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......
-
Kachalsky v. Cnty. of Westchester, Docket Nos. 11–3642 (Lead), 11–3962(XAP).
...distinguishable from that of the general community or of persons engaged in the same profession.” Klenosky v. N.Y City Police Dep't, 75 A.D.2d 793, 793, 428 N.Y.S.2d 256 (1st Dep't 1980), aff'd on op. below,53 N.Y.2d 685, 439 N.Y.S.2d 108, 421 N.E.2d 503 (1981). There is a substantial body ......
-
Christopher Davis, William P. Thompson, Wilson Lobao, Robert Capone, & Commonwealth Second Amendment, Inc. v. Grimes, Civil No. 13–10246–FDS.
...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 judge......
-
Davis v. Grimes, Civil No. 13–10246–FDS.
...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......