By Lewis Tesser and Timothy Nolen
Article 78 proceedings provide litigants a means of challenging administrative agencies’ determinations. A recent opinion from the Supreme Court, New York County, demonstrates some of the challenges litigants face when pursuing Article 78 proceedings. The case involved issues of administrative law, licensing, constitutional law and administrative procedure.
The case, Uddin v. New York City Taxi & Limousine Commission, et al, 2012 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 4193 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. County August 29, 2012), involved a taxi driver whose medallion taxicab license was taken away after the Taxi & Limousine Commission determined that he violated regulations on three separate occasions. The petitioner claimed that his due process rights had been violated because the rules governing the administrative appeals process were contained in an unpublished rule, and because the agency did not allow the taxi driver to cross-examine witnesses in person but instead only allowed him to question them over the phone. In dismissing the proceeding, Justice Lobis determined that, although the appeals procedures were contained in an unpublished rule, the petitioner was aware of the procedures and failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, thereby barring him from pursuing an Article 78 proceeding. Furthermore, Justice Lobis determined that the petitioner was not entitled to cross-examine the witnesses in person, and that telephonic cross-examination was permissible.
At Tesser, Ryan & Rochman, LLP, we have years of experience dealing with Federal, state and city administrative agencies. Our experience has given us a thorough understanding of procedure involved in administrative hearings. We can work with clients to help navigate the administrative process, and even challenge administrative determinations in court. In fact, partner Lewis Tesser has lectured as the LawLine Faculty Member presenting Continuing Legal Education on Article 78 Proceedings.