$10,000 To beat a $65 Parking Ticket

[eagle1]

10G TO BEAT$65 PARKING TICKET
By DAREH GREGORIAN
PrintEmailDigg ItRedditPermalinkStory Bottom

June 15, 2007 -- Sometimes it does pay to fight City Hall - even if it costs you bigtime.

Lawyer Sanford Young spent two years and almost $10,000, but finally beat the $65 ticket he fought all the way to Manhattan Supreme Court.

"I feel great," Young said yesterday after learning that Manhattan Justice Emily Jane Goodman had ordered the Parking Violations Bureau to pay his money back on the 2005 ticket.

"It's a good feeling to fight the system and right a wrong."

The lawyer estimated that his $9,935 loss was well worth it. "I figured I'm sick and tired and I'm not going to take it anymore," he said.

In her ruling, Goodman referred to Young's battle as the "unusual case of a parking-violation summons reaching the Supreme Court."

Young got the ticket on Nov. 29, 2005, after he parked on First Avenue near East 70th Street to have dinner with a friend. He returned from his $60 dinner to find a $65 ticket.

The summons charged him with violating the weekday no-parking rule between 4 p.m. and 7 p.m., and "noted the time of the offense as 6:59 p.m.," the judge's decision says.

The summons especially ticketed Young off because he made sure he didn't park until after 7.

He entered a plea of not guilty on the Parking Violation Bureau's Web site. He called the ticket "absurd and wrong," and said that as "lifelong New Yorker and lawyer," he knew when he could park.

"Therefore, I respectfully ask that the summons be dismissed," he wrote.

The city Department of Finance offered to reduce the fine to $43, but Young declined the offer.

In March 2006, a city administrative law judge found that Young was "not persuasive," and was guilty as charged.

Young appealed the ruling and lost - which led to his suit in state Supreme Court.

"It cost a fortune" and "30 to 40 hours of my legal time, but it was time well spent," Young said, predicting the case would pave the way for others to right ticket wrongs.

The city declined comment.

Young said if the city appeals the ruling, "I'll be ready."

Source New York Post

[Rye]

I wonder what the cost to tax payers was...

[spooky]

Originally Posted by Rye

I wonder what the cost to tax payers was...

NYC has a tax surplus

[DWarrior]

So he basically didn't change anything.

[Josh The Jew]

Originally Posted by Rye

I wonder what the cost to tax payers was...

I agree...people shouldn't challenge the government when it brings false charges against them because it costs too much in public funds. You know what? Fuck it -- the whole judiciary costs too much money -- why not just let the police decide when and how people should be punished for crimes? And trials are an extravagance also...just summary judgment by the popo.

We gotta think about the bottom line here folks.

[paul_r]

Originally Posted by Josh The Jew

I agree...people shouldn't challenge the government when it brings false charges against them because it costs too much in public funds. You know what? Fuck it -- the whole judiciary costs too much money -- why not just let the police decide when and how people should be punished for crimes? And trials are an extravagance also...just summary judgment by the popo.

We gotta think about the bottom line here folks.

doesn't look like he got costs, so $65, they lawyers are salaried I'd assume, the city pays them anyway.

[Rye]

Originally Posted by Josh The Jew

I agree...people shouldn't challenge the government when it brings false charges against them because it costs too much in public funds. You know what? Fuck it -- the whole judiciary costs too much money -- why not just let the police decide when and how people should be punished for crimes? And trials are an extravagance also...just summary judgment by the popo.

We gotta think about the bottom line here folks.

Actually we do, I dont understand why a municipal ticket can make its way all the way up to the supreme court. I call publicity stunt not a natter of justice or principal. Fucker shouldnt be driving in the city anyways.

[DWarrior]

Originally Posted by Josh The Jew

I agree...people shouldn't challenge the government when it brings false charges against them because it costs too much in public funds. You know what? Fuck it -- the whole judiciary costs too much money -- why not just let the police decide when and how people should be punished for crimes? And trials are an extravagance also...just summary judgment by the popo.

We gotta think about the bottom line here folks.

It would make sense if the result was reform of the NY ticket law. As it stands, this was a bad move by the concept of expected value.

[Pintman]

Originally Posted by Rye

I wonder what the cost to tax payers was...

Well, whatever it was, it wasn't caused by this guy, as you are implying, but by the police who filed the charge to begin with. He's got the right to fight it and blow $10K of his money if he wants.

1 minute before parking was allowed? de minimus non curat lex.

By the way, the New York Supreme Court is the local trial court, not the highest court in the state. That would be the New York Court of Appeals.

[Rye]

Originally Posted by Pintman

Well, whatever it was, it wasn't caused by this guy, as you are implying, but by the police who filed the charge to begin with. He's got the right to fight it and blow $10K of his money if he wants.

1 minute before parking was allowed? de minimus non curat lex.

By the way, the New York Supreme Court is the local trial court, not the highest court in the state. That would be the New York Court of Appeals.

1. He wasnt charged with anything it was a parking infraction, a fine.

2.Lawyer Sanford Young spent two years and almost $10,000, but finally beat the $65 ticket he fought all the way to Manhattan Supreme Court.

He entered a plea of not guilty on the Parking Violation Bureau's Web site. He called the ticket "absurd and wrong," and said that as "lifelong New Yorker and lawyer," he knew when he could park.

"Therefore, I respectfully ask that the summons be dismissed," he wrote.

The city Department of Finance offered to reduce the fine to $43, but Young declined the offer.

In March 2006, a city administrative law judge found that Young was "not persuasive," and was guilty as charged.

Young appealed the ruling and lost - which led to his suit in state Supreme Court.

you make it sound like he just went straight to court. It took what 2 years of BS.