The following excerpt is from Daxor Corp. v. State Dept. of Health, 659 N.Y.S.2d 189, 681 N.E.2d 356, 90 N.Y.2d 89 (N.Y. 1997):
To be contrasted against these laws are instances where the administrative body was without discretion to deny an application and thus the applicant had an entitlement to the license sought. In Walz v. Town of Smithtown, 46 F.3d 162, 168 [2d Cir.], cert denied 515 U.S. 1131, 115 S.Ct. 2557, 132 L.Ed.2d 810, for example, the court examined the authority of the Superintendent of Highways to deny an excavation permit and noted that upon the applicants providing certain information on the appropriate form, the permit "shall be issued in the name of the Superintendent of Highways of the Town of Smithtown." Because the Superintendent was without discretion to refuse to issue a permit, the court held that the applicants had a property right in the permit. Nor is this case like Sullivan v. Town of Salem, 805 F.2d 81, supra , where the licensing authority
Page 195
Thus, respondents had no property interest entitling them to a due process hearing. 3
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.