Chiaverini v. Connolly

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Chiaverini v. Connolly

104 A.D.2d 1034, 481 N.Y.S.2d 12, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20471

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

DecidedOctober 29, 1984

StatusPublished

This text of 104 A.D.2d 1034 (Chiaverini v. Connolly) 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

Chiaverini v. Connolly, 104 A.D.2d 1034, 481 N.Y.S.2d 12, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20471 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to prohibit respondents from “demoting the Petitioner from Detective to Police Officer”, petitioner appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Buell, J.), entered September 21, 1983, which granted respondents’ application to dismiss the petition.

Order and judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Petitioner conceded in his papers at Special Term that he has no property interest in his position as a detective, and therefore cannot raise that issue on appeal. He has also failed to demonstrate that his reassignment as a patrolman was a disciplinary [1035]*1035action. Indeed, such reassignment is not even an enumerated punishment according to the rules and regulations of the City of Yonkers Police Department, but is within the discretion of the Police Commissioner (see Matter of Petix v Connelie, 47 NY2d 457). Titone, J. P., Lazer, Bracken and Boyers, JJ., concur.

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

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to prohibit respondents from “demoting the Petitioner from Detective to Police Officer”, petitioner appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Buell, J.), entered September 21, 1983, which granted respondents’ application to dismiss the petition.

Order and judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Petitioner conceded in his papers at Special Term that he has no property interest in his position as a detective, and therefore cannot raise that issue on appeal. He has also failed to demonstrate that his reassignment as a patrolman was a disciplinary [1035]*1035action. Indeed, such reassignment is not even an enumerated punishment according to the rules and regulations of the City of Yonkers Police Department, but is within the discretion of the Police Commissioner (see Matter of Petix v Connelie, 47 NY2d 457). Titone, J. P., Lazer, Bracken and Boyers, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

104 A.D.2d 1034, 481 N.Y.S.2d 12, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20471, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chiaverini-v-connolly-nyappdiv-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack