Bronx Realty Advisory Bd., Inc. v. New York State Div. of Hous. & Cmty. Renewal, 532 N.E.2d 100 (NY 1988). · Go Syfert
Search
Bronx Realty Advisory Bd., Inc. v. New York State Div. of Hous. & Cmty. Renewal, 532 N.E.2d 100 (NY 1988). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
163 citation events (100 in the last 25 years) across 7 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Matter of Monaghan v. Schroeder (ny, 2025-12-16)
Treatment trajectory · 1988 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1988 2007 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers. How cited ↗
examined Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Monaghan v. Schroeder (4×)
NY · 2025 · confidence medium
Substantial evidence exists when "a reasonable mind could accept the report as 'adequate to support a conclusion or ultimate fact' " ( Gray , 73 NY2d at 743, citing 300 Gramatan Ave.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Matter of East 85th Garage LLC v. New York City Dept. of Bldgs.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2024 · confidence medium
Nor were petitioners' due process rights violated because OATH did not require the investigating officer to appear and testify under penalty of perjury ( see Gray v Adduci , 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Hogue v. Board of Educ. of the City Sch. Dist. of the City of N.Y.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2023 · confidence medium
Gray v Adduci , 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Hogue v. Board of Educ. of the City Sch. Dist. of the City of N.Y.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2023 · confidence medium
Gray v Adduci , 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Shanahan v. Justice Ctr. for the Protection of People with Special Needs
N.Y. App. Div. · 2021 · confidence medium
Even if this issue were properly before us, we would find it devoid of merit ( see Matter of Gordon v Brown , 84 NY2d 574, 579 [1994]; Matter of Gray v Adduci , 73 NY2d 741, 743 [1988]; Matter of Sookhu v Commissioner of Health of State of N.Y. , 31 AD3d 1012, 1014 [2006]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Haug v. State Univ. of N.Y. at Potsdam
NY · 2018 · confidence medium
Moreover, hearsay is admissible as competent evidence in an administrative proceeding, and if sufficiently relevant and probative may constitute substantial evidence even if contradicted by live testimony on credibility grounds ( see Matter of Gray v Adduci , 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]; Matter of National Basketball Assn. v New York State Div. of Human Rights , 68 NY2d 644, 646 [1986]; People ex rel.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Sherwood v. New York State Dept. of Motor Vehicles
N.Y. App. Div. · 2017 · confidence medium
Mc-Cabe’s testimony and his related report, in our view, establish that petitioner refused to submit to the chemical test — despite being advised, in clear and unequivocal terms, of the consequences (see Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742-743 [1988]; Matter of Peeso v Fiala, 130 AD3d 1442, 1443 [2015], lv denied 26 NY3d 910 [2015]; Matter of Dykeman v Jackson, 262 AD2d 877, 877-878 [1999]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Paul v. New York City Dept. of Educ.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2017 · confidence medium
The hearing officer was entitled to rely on hearsay (see Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]), and her credibility determinations are entitled to deference (see Matter of Berenhaus v Ward, 70 NY2d 436, 443-444 [1987]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Estafanous v. New York City Envtl. Control Bd.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2016 · confidence medium
Further, there is no merit to the petitioner’s contention that his right to due process was violated because the officer who issued the notices of violation was not available at the hearing for cross-examination (see Matter of Gordon v Brown, 84 NY2d 574, 579-580 [1994]; Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742-743 [1988]; Matter of Putnam Cos. v Shah, 93 AD3d 1315, 1316 [2012]; Matter of Smith v New York State Dept. of Health, 66 AD3d 1144, 1146-1147 [2009]; Matter of Wai Lun Fung v Daus, 45 AD3d 392, 392 [2007]).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Peeso v. Fiala
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
Contrary to petitioner’s further contention, the determination is supported by substantial evidence in the record, i.e., the report of refusal (see Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 743 [1988]).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Peeso v. Fiala
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
Contrary to petitioner’s further contention, the determination is supported by substantial evidence in the record, i.e., the report of refusal (see Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 743 [1988]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Smith v. New York City Department of Education
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · confidence medium
Contrary to petitioner’s contention, hearsay evidence can be the basis of an administrative determination (Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]), and each of the specifications upheld by the arbitrator was supported by testimony of witnesses having personal knowledge of the material facts or hearsay evidence that substantiated the basis for the charges.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Smith v. New York City Department of Education
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · confidence medium
Contrary to petitioner’s contention, hearsay evidence can be the basis of an administrative determination (Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]), and each of the specifications upheld by the arbitrator was supported by testimony of witnesses having personal knowledge of the material facts or hearsay evidence that substantiated the basis for the charges.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Rispoli v. Waterfront Commission
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · confidence medium
It is well established that “[hjearsay evidence can be the basis of an administrative determination” (Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Rispoli v. Waterfront Commission
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · confidence medium
It is well established that “[hjearsay evidence can be the basis of an administrative determination” (Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Murphy's Disposal Services, Inc. v. Gardner
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · confidence medium
Finally, and contrary to petitioners’ remaining argument, “[hjearsay evidence can be the basis of an administrative determination” (Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Murphy's Disposal Services, Inc. v. Gardner
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · confidence medium
Finally, and contrary to petitioners’ remaining argument, “[hjearsay evidence can be the basis of an administrative determination” (Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Mannino v. Department of Motor Vehicles
N.Y. App. Div. · 2012 · confidence medium
Contrary to the petitioner’s contentions, “[h] ear say evidence can be the basis of an administrative determination” (Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]; see Matter of Andresen v State of NY.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Mannino v. Department of Motor Vehicles
N.Y. App. Div. · 2012 · confidence medium
Contrary to the petitioner’s contentions, “[h] ear say evidence can be the basis of an administrative determination” (Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]; see Matter of Andresen v State of NY.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Gisors v. New York City Department of Education for City School District Region 10
N.Y. App. Div. · 2012 · confidence medium
Contrary to petitioner’s contention, hearsay evidence can be the basis of an administrative determination (Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]), and each of the specifications upheld by the hearing officer was supported by testimony of witnesses having personal knowledge of the material facts or hearsay evidence that substantiated the basis for the charges.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Colon v. City of New York Department of Education
N.Y. App. Div. · 2012 · confidence medium
Contrary to petitioner’s contention, “[h]earsay evidence can be the basis of an administrative determination” (Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Kerr v. Teresi
N.Y. App. Div. · 2012 · confidence medium
Despite petitioner’s assertion to the contrary, this hearsay evidence could properly form the basis of respondent’s determination (see Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]; Matter of Butts v Dwyer, 6 AD3d 1101, 1101 [2004]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) D & D Mason Contractors, Inc. v. Smith
N.Y. App. Div. · 2011 · confidence medium
Contrary to the petitioners’ assertion, hearsay evidence is admissible in an administrative proceeding, and where, as here, it is sufficiently relevant and probative, it may constitute substantial evidence (see Matter of Foster v Coughlin, 76 NY2d 964, 966 [1990]; Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]; People ex rel.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Meluch v. New York State & Local Police & Fire Retirement System
N.Y. App. Div. · 2011 · confidence medium
Inasmuch as petitioner failed to object to the admission of the report (see Matter of Feldon v New York State Comptroller, 69 AD3d 1092, 1092 [2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 702 [2010]) and did not request to call Mazella as a witness (see State Administrative Procedure Act § 304 [2]; Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 743 [1988]), we find that petitioner waived any objection to the admission and consideration of Mazella’s report.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Gongora v. New York City Department of Education
N.Y. Sup. Ct. · 2010 · confidence medium
Hearsay Substantial evidence may comprise only hearsay evidence that does not qualify as an exception to the rule against hearsay, as long as it is “sufficiently relevant and probative.” (Matter of Foster v Coughlin, 76 NY2d 964, 966 [1990]; Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d at 742; Matter of Perez v Wilmot, 67 NY2d 615, 616-617 [1986]; 49th St.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Hughes v. New York State Unified Court System
N.Y. App. Div. · 2010 · confidence medium
Hearsay evidence may be the basis for an administrative determination (see Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Ebling v. Town of Eden
N.Y. App. Div. · 2009 · confidence medium
Contrary to the further contention of petitioner, he was not denied his right to a fair hearing by the admission of hearsay evidence (see generally Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]; Matter of Gates of Goodness & Mercy v Johnson, 49 AD3d 1295 [2008]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Gates of Goodness & Mercy v. Johnson
N.Y. App. Div. · 2008 · confidence medium
The hearsay evidence presented by respondent was admissible in this administrative proceeding, and it was sufficiently relevant and probative to constitute substantial evidence (see Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]; People ex rel.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) S & S Pub, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority
N.Y. App. Div. · 2008 · confidence medium
Moreover, under appropriate circumstances, hearsay evidence may form the sole basis for an agency’s ultimate determination (see Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742-743 [1988]; Matter of Ridge, Inc. v New York State Liq.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Café La China Corp. v. New York State Liquor Authority
N.Y. App. Div. · 2007 · confidence medium
“Hearsay evidence can be the basis of an administrative determination” and, if sufficiently probative, it alone may constitute substantial evidence (Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]; Matter of Hoch v New York State Dept. of Health, 1 AD3d 994 [2003]).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Bradford v. New York City Housing Authority
N.Y. App. Div. · 2006 · confidence medium
Further, the determination was not affected by errors of law (see CPLR 7803 [3]; Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]; Matter of BiCounty Brokerage S. Corp. v State of N.Y.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Sookhu v. Commissioner of Health of State of New York (2×) also: Cited "see"
N.Y. App. Div. · 2006 · confidence medium
As to petitioner’s claim that he was prejudiced by the absence of direct testimony from patient A, that contention is undermined by his own failure to subpoena that patient, which he was authorized to do (see Public Health Law § 230 [10] [c] [4]; Matter of Gray v Adduci, supra at 743; see also State Administrative Procedure Act § 304 [2]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Kingston v. Gorman
N.Y. App. Div. · 2005 · confidence medium
That contention also lacks merit, inasmuch as petitioner was entitled to call any such persons to testify at the hearing but chose not to, apparently for tactical reasons (see 14 NYCRR 831.3 [d]; Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 743 [1988]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Scaccia v. Martinez
N.Y. App. Div. · 2004 · confidence medium
Hearsay evidence is admissible in administrative hearings (see Matter of Danielle G. v Schauseil, 292 AD2d 853 [2002]; Matter of Rivera v New York State Racing & Wagering Bd., 201 AD2d 922 [1994]; Matter of Leon’s Collision Shop v Adduci, 167 AD2d 986 [1990]), and such evidence may serve as “the basis of an administrative determination” without violating those rights (Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]; see generally Matter of Robert OO. v Dowling, 217 AD2d 785, 786 [1995], affd 87 NY2d 1043 [1996]; Matter of Prodromidis v McCoy, 292 AD2d 769, 770 [2002]; Matter of St.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Butts v. Dwyer
N.Y. App. Div. · 2004 · confidence medium
Because “[h]ear say evidence can be the basis of an administrative determination,” complainant’s supporting deposition provides a substantial basis for respondent’s determination (Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Hoch v. New York State Department of Health
N.Y. App. Div. · 2003 · confidence medium
“Hearsay evidence can be the basis of an administrative determination” and, if sufficiently relevant and probative, may alone constitute substantial evidence (Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]; see People ex rel.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Anderson v. Bane
N.Y. App. Div. · 1993 · confidence medium
Initially, we note that it is firmly established that hearsay is admissible in a hearing of this type (see, Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742; see also, 18 NYCRR 343.10 [b]), and that if the hearsay is "believable, relevant, and probative”, it alone may constitute a sufficient basis for the administrative agency’s determination (see, Riley v Schles, 185 AD2d 437, 438 ; Matter of Harry’s Chenango Wine & Liq. v State Liq.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Continental Laboratory, Inc. v. Perales
N.Y. App. Div. · 1992 · confidence medium
As to respondent’s failure to produce the physicians to testify at the hearing, we need merely note that petitioner had the burden of proof (see, 18 NYCRR 519.18 [d]) and was entitled to but made a conscious choice not to subpoena them to testify on its behalf (see, Matter of Gray v Adduci, supra, at 743; Matter of Harry’s Chenango Wine & Liq. v State Liq.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Harry's Chenango Wine & Liquor Inc. v. State Liquor Authority (2×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
N.Y. App. Div. · 1990 · confidence medium
Vega v Smith, supra), under the appropriate circumstances statements from absent witnesses may form the sole basis for an agency’s ultimate determination (see, Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742).
discussed Cited "see" Matter of Cyr v. New York State Dept. of Motor Vehicles
N.Y. App. Div. · 2025 · signal: see · confidence high
"Evidence which would not be admissible in a court, such as hearsay , is admissible in a departmental hearing" (15 NYCRR 127.6 [b] [emphasis added]) and "if sufficiently relevant and probative may constitute substantial evidence" ( Sadallah , 160 AD3d at 1483; see Matter of Gray v Adduci , 73 NY2d 741, 742-743 [1988]).
cited Cited "see" Matter of Parson v. Unified Ct. Sys. of the State of New York
N.Y. App. Div. · 2024 · signal: see · confidence high
Vega v Smith , 66 NY2d 130, 139 [1985]; see Matter of Gray v Adduci , 73 NY2d 741, 742-743 [1988]).
discussed Cited "see" Matter of Conklin v. New York State Off. of Children & Family Servs.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2022 · signal: see · confidence high
Moreover, contrary to the petitioner's contention, "hearsay is admissible as competent evidence in an administrative proceeding, and if sufficiently relevant and probative may constitute substantial evidence even if contradicted by live testimony on credibility grounds" ( Matter of Haug v State Univ. of N.Y. at Potsdam , 32 NY3d at 1046; see Matter of Gray v Adduci , 73 NY2d 741, 742 ; Matter of Peng v Poole , 191 AD3d at 887 ).
discussed Cited "see" Matter of Sadallah v. New York State Dept. of Motor Vehs.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2018 · signal: see · confidence high
It is well settled that " [h]earsay evidence is admissible in administrative hearings' . . . , and if sufficiently relevant and probative may constitute substantial evidence' " ( Matter of Mastrodonato v New York State Dept. of Motor Vehicles , 27 AD3d 1121, 1122 [4th Dept 2006]; see Gray , 73 NY2d at 742-743).
cited Cited "see" Matter of LaChance v. New York State Dept. of Motor Vehicles
N.Y. App. Div. · 2018 · signal: see · confidence high
Assoc. v State Div. [*2]of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 180 ; see Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 743 ; Matter of N.F.
discussed Cited "see" Matter of Williams v. New York State Justice Ctr. for The Protection of People With Special Needs
N.Y. App. Div. · 2017 · signal: see · confidence high
Petitioner’s assertion that the Justice Center’s determination is not supported by substantial evidence because certain of the proof adduced at the hearing constituted hearsay is unavailing, as “it is axiomatic that hearsay is admissible in administrative hearings and may be used to support a finding of substantial evidence” (Matter of Hoffman v Village of Sidney, 252 AD2d 844, 845 [1998]; see Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]; Matter of Parris v Shah, 127 AD3d 515, 515 [2015]).
cited Cited "see" Dennard v. City of Buffalo Examining Board of Plumbers
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
Vega v Smith, 66 NY2d 130, 139 [1985]; see Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988] ).
cited Cited "see" DENNARD, MARVIN v. CITY OF BUFFALO EXAMINING BOARD OF
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
Vega v Smith, 66 NY2d 130, 139 ; see Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 ).
cited Cited "see" Dennard v. City of Buffalo Examining Board of Plumbers
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
Vega v Smith, 66 NY2d 130, 139 [1985]; see Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988] ).
cited Cited "see" Today's Lounge of Oneonta, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · signal: see · confidence high
Auth., 257 AD2d 625, 626-627 [1999]; see generally Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]).
cited Cited "see" Today's Lounge of Oneonta, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · signal: see · confidence high
Auth., 257 AD2d 625, 626-627 [1999]; see generally Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Bronx Realty Advisory Board, Inc.
v.
New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal
New York Court of Appeals.
Nov 17, 1988.
532 N.E.2d 100
Published

Motion insofar as it seeks leave to appeal from so much of the Appellate Division order as affirmed the order of Supreme Court denying the motion to renew dismissed upon the ground that that portion of the order does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution; motion for leave to appeal otherwise denied.