Aston v. Rydzynski

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Aston v. Rydzynski

110 A.D.2d 1074, 489 N.Y.S.2d 28, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48955

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 5, 1985

StatusPublished

This text of 110 A.D.2d 1074 (Aston v. Rydzynski) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Aston v. Rydzynski, 110 A.D.2d 1074, 489 N.Y.S.2d 28, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48955 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

Where, as here, the penalty is challenged as arbitrary and capricious, the question is whether it is “ ‘so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness’ ” (Matter of Gibides v Powers, 45 NY2d 994, 996, quoting Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222, 237). The record shows that 11 charges of misconduct were preferred against petitioner; eight were upheld after a hearing, including charges of filing a false report and being absent from duty without authorization. We cannot say on this record that the penalty of dismissal was improper. We agree with respondents that the petition raises no issue of fact requiring a trial (see, CPLR 7804 [h]). (Article 78 proceeding transferred by order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Gossel, J.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Callahan, Doerr, Denman and O’Donnell, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Where, as here, the penalty is challenged as arbitrary and capricious, the question is whether it is “ ‘so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness’ ” (Matter of Gibides v Powers, 45 NY2d 994, 996, quoting Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222, 237). The record shows that 11 charges of misconduct were preferred against petitioner; eight were upheld after a hearing, including charges of filing a false report and being absent from duty without authorization. We cannot say on this record that the penalty of dismissal was improper. We agree with respondents that the petition raises no issue of fact requiring a trial (see, CPLR 7804 [h]). (Article 78 proceeding transferred by order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Gossel, J.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Callahan, Doerr, Denman and O’Donnell, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

110 A.D.2d 1074, 489 N.Y.S.2d 28, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48955, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aston-v-rydzynski-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack