Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re Application of Pazian

Sup Ct, New York County

September 9, 2013

IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF RICHARD PAZIAN, Petitioner,
v.
THE DEPARTMENT OF CITYWIDE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES and THE NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS, Respondents. FOR A JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 78 OF THE CIVIL PRACTICE LAW AND RULES Index No. 112500/11

Unpublished Opinion

Hon. Doris Ling-Cohan, Justice

The following papers, numbered 1-4 were considered on this Article 78:

PAPERS NUMBERED

Notice of Motion/Order to Show Cause, — Affidavits — Exhibits 1, 2

Answering Affidavits — Exhibits __ 3

Replying Affidavits __ 4

Cross-Motion: [ ] Yes [ X ] No

Upon the foregoing papers, it is ordered that this Article 78 is decided as indicated below.

Petitioner Richard Pazian seeks an order pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR), reversing respondents Department of Citywide Administrative Services (DCAS) and the New York City Department of Buildings's (DOB) determination, dated February 16, 2012, denying petitioner's application for a Master Plumber's License (License), and directing respondents to issue the License.

BACKGROUND

Respondent DCAS is the agency charged with the administration of examinations for the License. Respondent DOB is the agency charged with the investigation of candidates' background and experience for the License, and issuance of the License. Petitioner applied for the License in October

2006 and took the required examinations. By letter dated April 3, 2008, respondent DOB informed petitioner that he passed such examinations. Thereafter, petitioner submitted the documentation requested by respondent DOB to support his application for the License, which included, inter alia, a list of over nine years of practical work experience. Respondent DOB denied petitioner's License application by letter dated November 5, 2009. Respondent DOB's letter states that the period of time petitioner worked at "Metro [Sewer & Drain could] not be counted toward the required practical experience since the maintenance-type work performed by that entity is not considered work in the design and installation of plumbing or gas systems[, and that they] could not verified that [petitioner was] employed full-time under the direct and continuing supervision of a licensed plumber at Scarponi [& Sons Plumbing and Heating]." Verified Petition, Exh. D, p. 2. The letter further stated that all of petitioner's work experience at All County, and a portion of his experience at Scarponi & Sons Plumbing and Heating (Scarponi & Sons), could be credited towards the seven years of required experience to obtain the License. Id. Thus, respondent DOB credited petitioner for five years and one-month work experience at All County, and one year and four months work experience at Scarponi & Sons, for a total of six years and four months of credited work experience.

Petitioner requested reconsideration of his application in January 2010. By letter dated December 23, 2010, respondent DOB sought additional information and documents from petitioner to consider his application, including documentation related to petitioner's work experience at All County. In February 2011, petitioner and Mr. Scarponi appeared before DOB's Master Plumber and Master Fire Suppression Piping Contractor Board (Board) regarding petitioner's claimed experience at Metro Sewer & Drain (Metro), which was later converted, by Scarponi, into Scarponi & Sons. By letter dated July 20, 2011 (Final Determination), respondent DOB denied petitioner's request for reconsideration, stating that petitioner's experience at All County, which was previously credited, could not now be credited, as petitioner failed to provide supporting documentation to verify the type of work he performed at All County from 1984 through 1989. See Verified Petition, Exh. A, p. 2. The Final Determination also stated that, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.