Callari v. Bailes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Callari v. Bailes

302 A.D.2d 595, 755 N.Y.S.2d 636, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1832

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

DecidedFebruary 24, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 302 A.D.2d 595 (Callari v. Bailes) 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

Callari v. Bailes, 302 A.D.2d 595, 755 N.Y.S.2d 636, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1832 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to Public Officers Law § 36 to remove the respondent from the office of Treasurer of the Selden Fire District.

Adjudged that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

Removal from office pursuant to Public Officers Law § 36 is not warranted where there are no “allegations of self-dealing, corrupt activities, conflict of interest, moral turpitude, intentional wrongdoing or violation of a public trust” (Matter of Deats v Carpenter, 61 AD2d 320, 322 [1978]; Matter of Morin v Gallagher, 221 AD2d 765, 766 [1995]).

The misconduct alleged, even if accepted as true, does not rise to the level necessary to justify the respondent’s removal (see Matter of Morin v Gallagher, supra). Accordingly, the petition must be denied and the proceeding dismissed. Ritter, J.P., McGinity, Townes and Mastro, JJ., concur.

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

Proceeding pursuant to Public Officers Law § 36 to remove the respondent from the office of Treasurer of the Selden Fire District.

Adjudged that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

Removal from office pursuant to Public Officers Law § 36 is not warranted where there are no “allegations of self-dealing, corrupt activities, conflict of interest, moral turpitude, intentional wrongdoing or violation of a public trust” (Matter of Deats v Carpenter, 61 AD2d 320, 322 [1978]; Matter of Morin v Gallagher, 221 AD2d 765, 766 [1995]).

The misconduct alleged, even if accepted as true, does not rise to the level necessary to justify the respondent’s removal (see Matter of Morin v Gallagher, supra). Accordingly, the petition must be denied and the proceeding dismissed. Ritter, J.P., McGinity, Townes and Mastro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

302 A.D.2d 595, 755 N.Y.S.2d 636, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1832, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/callari-v-bailes-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack