| Matter of Maroti v Hirst |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 00408 [91 AD3d 541] |
| January 24, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| In the Matter of Thomas Maroti, Appellant, v Martha K. Hirst et al., Respondents. |
—[*1]
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Marta Ross of counsel), for
respondents.
Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Michael D. Stallman, J.), entered November 9, 2010, which denied the petition seeking to annul the determination by respondent Department of Citywide Administrative Services of the City of New York denying petitioner's application for a master rigger's license, and dismissed the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The determination to deny petitioner's application for a master rigger's license had a rational basis. The record demonstrates that petitioner failed to present evidence that he gained the requisite qualifying experience under the direct and continuing supervision of a master rigger duly licensed in the City of New York for five of the seven years prior to the filing of the application (see Matter of Auringer v Department of Citywide Admin. Servs. of City of N.Y., 28 AD3d 381 [2006]; Administrative Code of City of NY §§ 28-404.1, 28-404.3.1).
We have considered petitioner's remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Tom, J.P., Friedman, DeGrasse, Richter and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.