IN RE: STOVES & STONE (2005)

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Raymond P. Martinez, Commissioner of the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles Appeals Board, dated May 20, 2002, which confirmed the findings of an Administrative Law Judge, dated December 12, 2001, made after a hearing, that the petitioner violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 401(7)(F)(b) and New York City Traffic Rules and Regulations (34 RCNY) § 4-15(b)(9), and imposed a penalty.

ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed, on the merits, with costs.

 Judicial review of a determination rendered by an administrative body after a hearing is limited to whether that determination is supported by substantial evidence upon the entire record (see 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v. State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176, 408 N.Y.S.2d 54, 379 N.E.2d 1183;  Matter of Anthony Grace & Sons v. New York State Dept. of Motor Vehs., 266 A.D.2d 284, 698 N.Y.S.2d 269).   Moreover, “[a] reviewing court will not undertake the functions of weighing evidence and assessing credibility, as they are committed to the Administrative Law Judge” (Matter of Scara-Mix, Inc. v. Martinez, 305 A.D.2d 418, 758 N.Y.S.2d 507).

The testimony of the traffic enforcement agent who issued the summons regarding the location of the weighing station and his training, accompanied by certificates establishing the accuracies of the devices he used in weighing the petitioner's vehicle, provided a sufficient basis for the determination of the Administrative Law Judge (see Matter of Masons v. Martinez, 8 A.D.3d 671, 779 N.Y.S.2d 537;  Matter of Maspeth Ave. Operating Corp. v. Martinez, 2 A.D.3d 446, 767 N.Y.S.2d 868;  Matter of Scara-Mix, Inc. v. Martinez, supra).   As the determination is supported by substantial evidence, we decline to disturb it (see Matter of Ferrara Equip. v. Martinez, 305 A.D.2d 411, 758 N.Y.S.2d 502).

The petitioner's remaining contention was not raised in the petition, and thus has been waived (see Matter of David v. Christian, 134 A.D.2d 349, 520 N.Y.S.2d 826).