Nelke v. Department of Motor Vehicles
N.Y. App. Div.
Citation analytics
How this case sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.
Citations by decade
Most recently cited by10
- 2025Matter of Turner v. New York State Off. of Ct. Admin. N.Y. App. Div.
- 2025Matter of Marks v. City of New York N.Y. App. Div.
- 2024Matter of Linzhong Zhuo v. City of New York N.Y. App. Div.
- 2024Matter of Nobel v. New York City Dept. of Bldgs. N.Y. App. Div.
- 2023Matter of CFA Holdings EH LLC v. New York State Liq. Auth. N.Y. App. Div.
- 2019Matter of Riel v. State of N.Y. Off. of Children & Family Servs. N.Y. App. Div.
- 2019Matter of Gibbs v. New York State Dept. of Motor Vehs. N.Y. App. Div.
- 2018Matter of LaChance v. New York State Dept. of Motor Vehicles N.Y. App. Div.
- 2018Matter of Charles v. Poole N.Y. App. Div.
- 2015Rivera v. New York City Housing Authority N.Y. App. Div.
Cites 1 case
- DeOliveira v. New York State Department of Motor Vehicles
Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.
Opinion
In the Matter of Richard A. Nelke, Jr., Petitioner, v Department of Motor Vehicles of the State of New York, Respondent.
Determination after hearing by respondent’s appeals board, dated May 8, 2009, which affirmed petitioner’s traffic conviction, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied, and this proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Jane S. Solomon, JJ, entered November 10, 2009), dismissed, without costs.
Petitioner was charged with disobeying a red light, in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1111 (d) (1). The police officer testified that while stationed at an intersection, he observed petitioner’s vehicle drive through a red light, and then followed it without losing sight, issuing petitioner the ticket two blocks away. Petitioner claimed he was at a different intersection and that the officer had mistaken his car for another vehicle.
This Court’s review of an administrative agency’s determination after a hearing is limited to whether the determination was supported by substantial evidence, and in doing so, deference must be given to the fact-finding and credibility determinations of the agency (Matter of DeOliveira v New York State Dept. of Motor Vehs., 271 AD2d 607 [2000]). While petitioner’s evidence conflicted with the officer’s testimony, we must defer to respondent’s decision to credit the officer’s account. Concur— Sweeny, J.P., Catterson, Moskowitz, Renwick and Richter, JJ.