Black v. Board of Fire Commissioners

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Black v. Board of Fire Commissioners

191 A.D.2d 551, 595 N.Y.S.2d 692, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2267

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 15, 1993·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinions

—Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Board of Fire Commissioners of the Seaford Fire District, dated August 16, 1990, which, after a hearing, suspended the petitioner from his position as a volunteer firefighter until January 1, 1991.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

There was substantial evidence before the respondent Board of Fire Commissioners to support its conclusion that the petitioner had engaged in "misconduct”, justifying his suspension under General Municipal Law § 209-Z (see, Matter of Di Maria v Ross, 52 NY2d 771). The Board was authorized to suspend the petitioner for his misconduct notwithstanding that it occurred while he was off-duty and was not directly related to his activities with the Fire District (see, Matter of Logan v Village of New Paltz, 129 AD2d 935; Matter of Martelle v Margeson, 116 AD2d 989; Matter of Cromwell v Bates, 105 AD2d 699; Matter of Pisano v McKenna, 120 Misc 2d 536).

We have considered the petitioner’s remaining contention [552] and find that it is without merit. Lawrence, J. P., Miller and Copertino, JJ., concur.

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

—Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Board of Fire Commissioners of the Seaford Fire District, dated August 16, 1990, which, after a hearing, suspended the petitioner from his position as a volunteer firefighter until January 1, 1991.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

There was substantial evidence before the respondent Board of Fire Commissioners to support its conclusion that the petitioner had engaged in "misconduct”, justifying his suspension under General Municipal Law § 209-Z (see, Matter of Di Maria v Ross, 52 NY2d 771). The Board was authorized to suspend the petitioner for his misconduct notwithstanding that it occurred while he was off-duty and was not directly related to his activities with the Fire District (see, Matter of Logan v Village of New Paltz, 129 AD2d 935; Matter of Martelle v Margeson, 116 AD2d 989; Matter of Cromwell v Bates, 105 AD2d 699; Matter of Pisano v McKenna, 120 Misc 2d 536).

We have considered the petitioner’s remaining contention [552] and find that it is without merit. Lawrence, J. P., Miller and Copertino, JJ., concur.

Black v. Board of Fire Commissioners, 191 A.D.2d 551, 595 N.Y.S.2d 692, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2267 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

191 A.D.2d 551 (Black v. Board of Fire Commissioners) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinions

Related