Bajpayi v. SUNY Downstate Medical Center
This text of 113 A.D.3d 846 (Bajpayi v. SUNY Downstate Medical Center) 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.
Opinion
Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the respondent SUNY Downstate Medical Center (hereinafter Downstate) followed its own policies before denying him credit for his fourth year of post-graduate medical training and, thus, its determination was not arbitrary and capricious (see Matter of Mullen v County of Suffolk Police Dept., 307 AD2d 1036, 1037 [2003]; Matter of Church v Wing, 229 AD2d 1019, 1020 [1996]). The petitioner’s actions constituted “misconduct” as that term is defined in Downstate’s Misconduct Due Process Policy. As a result, the due process procedures required under the Misconduct Due Process Policy were triggered, but, unlike Downstate’s Academic Performance Due Process Policy, the Misconduct Due Process Policy [847]*847did not require Downstate to provide the petitioner with a letter of deficiency and an opportunity to cure.
Further, contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the denial of credit for a previously completed period of training is an authorized penalty under the Misconduct Due Process Policy (cf. Matter of Ram v Board of Health of Nassau County Health Dist., 216 AD2d 470, 471 [1995]; Matter of Brabham v Weinstein, 89 AD2d 566 [1982]).
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition and, in effect, dismissed the proceeding. Mastro, J.P., Chambers, Lott and Miller, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
113 A.D.3d 846, 979 N.Y.2d 534, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bajpayi-v-suny-downstate-medical-center-nyappdiv-2014.