Search for: "MATTER OF O'BRIEN v. Keegan" Results 1 - 1 of 1
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Feb 2010, 10:05 am by Eugene Volokh
Accordingly, the respondent’s determination was not arbitrary or capricious and should not be disturbed (see Matter of O’Brien v Keegan, 87 NY2d 436, 439; Matter of Sarro v Smith, 8 AD3d at 395). [read post]