Matter of Thomas v O'Rourke

Matter of Matter of Thomas v O'Rourke 2011 NY Slip Op 08764 Decided on November 29, 2011 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on November 29, 2011
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKAPPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
MARK C. DILLON, J.P.
DANIEL D. ANGIOLILLO
ANITA R. FLORIO
THOMAS A. DICKERSON, JJ.
2010-11244
(Index No. 21905/10)

[*1]In the Matter of Judith Thomas, petitioner,

v

Eileen O'Rourke, etc., et al., respondents.




Mihaela Petrescu, White Plains, N.Y., for petitioner.
Kathleen E. Gill, New Rochelle, N.Y. (Kenneth E. Powell of
counsel), for respondents.


DECISION & JUDGMENT

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Section 8 Administrator for the City of New Rochelle dated May 8, 2010, which, after a hearing, confirmed the termination of the petitioner's participation in the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program.

ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.

The record contains substantial evidence to support the respondents' determination terminating the petitioner's participation in the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program (see 24 CFR 982.552[b][2] [2010]; Matter of Friend v Mulligan, 16 AD3d 685, 686; Matter of Douglas v Lannert, 272 AD2d 327, 327). In addition, the notice of termination adequately apprised the petitioner of the violations upon which the termination of her benefits from the program was based (see Matter of Block v Ambach, 73 NY2d 323, 333; Matter of Friend v Mulligan, 16 AD3d at 686).

The petitioner's remaining contentions are without merit.
DILLON, J.P., ANGIOLILLO, FLORIO and DICKERSON, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Matthew G. Kiernan

Clerk of the Court