Things found when looking at Article 78 appeals of NYC gun license denials (thread)

2003: Carry license denied based on a "less than honorable discharge" from the Marines in 1988 and two arrests in 1995 and 1996. Application remanded for reconsideration.

2006: Judge rules that applicant "is primarily being held responsible for an arrest that was subsequently sealed and dismissed", orders NYPD to grant the rifle/shotgun license application.

2006: Handgun license denied based on 1996 incident where "petitioner fired a weapon at a tree in an attempt to frighten away a burglar who was ultimately convicted." Application remanded for reconsideration. (1/2)

"...the continual denial of petitioner’s application in these circumstances raises the question of whether the petitioner is simply being penalized for having chosen, almost 10 years ago, to exercise his right to a hearing rather than accept the offered 6 months suspension." (2)

2001: Target pistol permit denied based on arrests in 1975 and 1989. NYPD said he lied on question about using narcotics because he was arrested (but not convicted) for possession of heroin. Application remanded for de novo review. (1/2)

"Petitioner's arrest for possession of drugs does not necessarily mean that he used drugs. Thus, the only factor respondent may consider is petitioner's arrest for possession and his subsequent plea "to disorderly conduct". (2/2)

2001: Target pistol license denied because the applicant didn't show participation at a range in NYC. Judge says the rules only require the applicant to show participation at a range in New York. Bonus: NYC tried to change their reason for denial partway through the appeal.

2006-8: NYPD denies application for renewal handgun license because applicant failed to timely renew it. What happened: NYPD had his current address on file but sent the renewal notice to the wrong address. Judge directs NYPD to grant the renewal. NYPD appeals and loses again.

1974: NYPD denies pistol license application based on applicant's "unstable employment". Judge: "...that, in and of itself, may not be proper basis upon which to have denied petitioner's application." Remanded for new hearing. https://casetext.com/case/klapper-v-codd

1974: NY appellate court unanimously reverses lower court, says NYPD was wrong to deny on-premises pistol permit based on "insufficient needs". Court says that "showing of need" standard only applies to carry permits. Remanded for reprocessing. https://casetext.com/case/shapiro-v-cawley

1975: NYPD continues denying on-premises pistol licenses "on the sole ground of 'Insufficient Need'" even after appellate court told them not to. Judge grants preliminary injunction, says NYPD "is constrained to follow the mandate of our higher courts". https://casetext.com/case/turner-v-codd

2004: NYPD defaults in handgun license appeal, judge orders the city to issue a license to the applicant.

2007: NYPD denies carry guard pistol license based on two dismissed+sealed arrests from 1999 and 2001, one of which was for marijuana possession. Judge directs NYPD to grant the license. (1/2) https://casetext.com/case/matter-of-farrell-v-kelly

"An arrest alone provides no rational basis to conclude that petitioner is lacking in character and unfit to hold a restricted carry guard license." (2/2)

2007: Man temporarily transferrers his guns to an FFL because he thinks his licenses are going to be suspended. When NYPD suspends the licenses, he tells them what happened, and they revoke the licenses instead. Judge orders restoration of licenses. (1/2) https://casetext.com/case/in-matter-of-koenig-v-kelly

"...it is undisputed that petitioner informed Officer Levine of the location of his guns the morning after he received her letter, and immediately sought to comply... Accordingly, Director Prasso's statement, that petitioner sought to evade a requirement, is entirely irrational."

2002: NYPD denies carry permit based on two arrests from 1991 and 1993, of which one resulted in acquittal and one was dismissed. Judge remands for de novo review. (1/2)

"...the respondent merely repeated, verbatim, the comments contained in the on-line booking report, respondent also did not investigate, in any meaningful way, the circumstances surrounding petitioner’s arrests." (2/2)