| Matter of Delakas v Mintz |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 07054 [19 NY3d 1056] |
| October 23, 2012 |
| Court of Appeals |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| As corrected through Wednesday, December 26, 2012 |
| In the Matter of Jerry Delakas, Appellant, v Jonathan Mintz, in His Capacity as Commissioner of the New York City Department of Consumer Affairs, Respondent. |
Decided October 23, 2012
Matter of Delakas v Mintz, 94 AD3d 643, affirmed.
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Santamarina & Associates, New York City (Gil Santamarina of counsel), for appellant.
Proskauer Rose LLP, New York City (Alyse Fiori of counsel), and Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel (Elizabeth S. Natrella of counsel) for respondent.
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
The determination of the New York City Department of Consumer Affairs to deny [*2]petitioner's license to operate a newsstand{**19 NY3d at 1058} because petitioner was not financially dependent on the licensee within the meaning of 6 RCNY 2-64 (a) (12) had a rational basis and was not arbitrary or capricious.
Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.