Cantres v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cantres v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.

309 A.D.2d 675, 766 N.Y.S.2d 349, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11150

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

DecidedOctober 28, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 309 A.D.2d 675 (Cantres v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.) 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

Cantres v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp., 309 A.D.2d 675, 766 N.Y.S.2d 349, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11150 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Determination of respondents, dated February 26, 2002, suspending petitioner for 30 days from his position of employment as an institutional aide at respondent Seaview Hospital Rehabilitation Center and Home, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [William Wetzel, J.], entered on or about August 30, 2002), dismissed, without costs.

[676]*676Substantial evidence (see 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 180-182 [1978]), including the testimony of several witnesses to the conduct at issue, supports respondents’ findings that petitioner was repeatedly insubordinate, absent without excuse from work assignments, and on one occasion became embroiled in an unseemly and disruptive verbal altercation with a coworker. The penalty imposed for the proven misconduct does not shock our sense of fairness and, accordingly, may not be disturbed (see Matter of Kelly v Safir, 96 NY2d 32, 39-40 [2001]). Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Lerner, Friedman and Marlow, JJ.

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

Determination of respondents, dated February 26, 2002, suspending petitioner for 30 days from his position of employment as an institutional aide at respondent Seaview Hospital Rehabilitation Center and Home, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [William Wetzel, J.], entered on or about August 30, 2002), dismissed, without costs.

[676]*676Substantial evidence (see 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 180-182 [1978]), including the testimony of several witnesses to the conduct at issue, supports respondents’ findings that petitioner was repeatedly insubordinate, absent without excuse from work assignments, and on one occasion became embroiled in an unseemly and disruptive verbal altercation with a coworker. The penalty imposed for the proven misconduct does not shock our sense of fairness and, accordingly, may not be disturbed (see Matter of Kelly v Safir, 96 NY2d 32, 39-40 [2001]). Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Lerner, Friedman and Marlow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

309 A.D.2d 675, 766 N.Y.S.2d 349, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11150, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cantres-v-new-york-city-health-hospitals-corp-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack