Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: OZNOR CORPORATION, doing business as Clawson's Grocery, Petitioner, v. COUNTY OF MONROE, Monroe Department of Public Health and its President, Carol Ann Podgorski, in her official capacity, Respondents.
Petitioner commenced this proceeding seeking to annul the determination that it violated the Public Health Law by selling tobacco to a minor. Initially, we note that the petition raises no substantial evidence issue, and thus Supreme Court erred in transferring the proceeding to this Court pursuant to CPLR 7804(g). Nevertheless, we consider the merits of the petition in the interest of judicial economy (see Matter of Ryder v. Daines, 57 A.D.3d 1411, 870 N.Y.S.2d 208; Matter of Rauch v. DeBuono, 265 A.D.2d 797, 696 N.Y.S.2d 923).
We reject the contention of petitioner that its constitutional rights were violated by virtue of the fact that the formal notice of violation was signed by an inspector from the Monroe County Department of Health who did not observe the violation (see Matter of Fay's Inc. v. New York State Dept. of Health, 241 A.D.2d 815, 660 N.Y.S.2d 470). Also contrary to the contention of petitioner, its right to due process in this administrative proceeding was not violated inasmuch as the record establishes that it received adequate notice of the allegations against it and an opportunity to be heard (see generally Matter of Tax Foreclosure No. 35, 127 A.D.2d 220, 514 N.Y.S.2d 390, affd. 71 N.Y.2d 863, 527 N.Y.S.2d 747, 522 N.E.2d 1044). We have considered petitioner's remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit.
It is hereby ORDERED that the determination is unanimously confirmed without costs and the petition is dismissed.
MEMORANDUM:
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: March 27, 2009
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)