Zinman v. Ambach

Citation401 N.Y.S.2d 307,60 A.D.2d 731
PartiesIn the Matter of Lee ZINMAN, Petitioner, v. Gordon AMBACH, as Commissioner of Education of the State of New York, et al., Respondents.
Decision Date29 December 1977
CourtNew York Supreme Court Appellate Division

Stanley R. Goldstein, New York City (Barry J. Pinkowitz, New York City, of counsel), for petitioner.

Louis J. Lefkowitz, Atty. Gen. (John J. O'Grady, New York City, of counsel), for respondents.

Before SWEENEY, J. P., and KANE, MAHONEY, LARKIN and HERLIHY, JJ.

MEMORANDUM DECISION.

Proceeding initiated in this court pursuant to subdivision 4 of section 6510 of the Education Law to annul a determination of the Commissioner of Education suspending petitioner's license to practice podiatry.

The petitioner alleges in his brief as follows:

Petitioner does not dispute that he was convicted of a crime within the meaning of Section 6509(5)(b) of the Education Law nor that his admission of having committed the acts constituting such crime represents unprofessional conduct within the meaning of Section 6509(9) of the Education Law. However, Petitioner contends that the measure of discipline imposed by the Commissioner is so shocking to one's sense of justice as to warrant this Court annulling the Commissioner's judgment.

The record does not establish that the discipline imposed was unwarranted (see Matter of Gliwa v. Board of Regents, 58 A.D.2d 721, 396 N.Y.S.2d 289, mot. for lv. to app. den. 42 N.Y.2d ---, ---N.Y.S.2d ---, ---N.E.2d ----(Dec. 20, 1977)) and accordingly, this court may not interfere with the punishment (Matter of Pell v. Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 N.Y.2d 222, 356 N.Y.S.2d 833, 313 N.E.2d 321).

Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs.

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Zinman v. Black & Decker (U.S.), Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • 12 Enero 1993
    ...had been suspended, which suspension was affirmed by the Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division. See Zinman v. Ambach, 60 A.D.2d 731, 401 N.Y.S.2d 307 (3d Dep't 1977). After disclosing this information, the judge There are a number of alternatives confronting us at this juncture. One......
  • Crawford v. State
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 29 Diciembre 1977

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT