Bailey v. County of Yates

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bailey v. County of Yates

265 A.D.2d 934, 696 N.Y.S.2d 325, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10082

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 1, 1999·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly held that the determination of respondent Yates County Legislature upholding the decision of the Grievance Hearing Committee denying petitioner’s grievance was not arbitrary or capricious and had a rational basis (see, CPLR 7803 [3]; Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222, 231). Pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement, respondent County of Yates (County) was not required to accept the advisory opinion of the arbitrator (see, Matter of Plainedge Fedn. of Teachers v Plainedge Union Free School Dist., 58 NY2d 902). Finally, the County is not estopped from denying petitioner’s request for relief based on erroneous advice given by its employee (see, Matter of Smith v New York State & Local Retirement Sys., 199 AD2d 763, 764; see also, Matter of E.F.S. Ventures Corp. v Foster, 71 NY2d 359, 371). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Yates County, Bender, J. — CPLR art 78.) Present — Lawton, J. P., Hayes, Pigott, Jr., Hurlbutt and Scudder, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly held that the determination of respondent Yates County Legislature upholding the decision of the Grievance Hearing Committee denying petitioner’s grievance was not arbitrary or capricious and had a rational basis (see, CPLR 7803 [3]; Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222, 231). Pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement, respondent County of Yates (County) was not required to accept the advisory opinion of the arbitrator (see, Matter of Plainedge Fedn. of Teachers v Plainedge Union Free School Dist., 58 NY2d 902). Finally, the County is not estopped from denying petitioner’s request for relief based on erroneous advice given by its employee (see, Matter of Smith v New York State & Local Retirement Sys., 199 AD2d 763, 764; see also, Matter of E.F.S. Ventures Corp. v Foster, 71 NY2d 359, 371). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Yates County, Bender, J. — CPLR art 78.) Present — Lawton, J. P., Hayes, Pigott, Jr., Hurlbutt and Scudder, JJ.

Bailey v. County of Yates, 265 A.D.2d 934, 696 N.Y.S.2d 325, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10082 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

265 A.D.2d 934 (Bailey v. County of Yates) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related