Corr v. McCall

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Corr v. McCall

202 A.D.2d 945, 610 N.Y.S.2d 98, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3077

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

DecidedMarch 31, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 202 A.D.2d 945 (Corr v. McCall) 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

Corr v. McCall, 202 A.D.2d 945, 610 N.Y.S.2d 98, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3077 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which excluded certain payments in calculating his final average salary for retirement purposes.

In calculating petitioner’s final average salary, respondent excluded payments made in anticipation of retirement, payments as an early retirement incentive and payments for unused sick leave. This was neither irrational nor unreasonable and, accordingly, respondent’s determination must be upheld. Inclusion of such payments would result in an unjustified and improper inflation of petitioner’s final average salary as they are not a true reflection of petitioner’s employment history. Petitioner’s remaining contention has been considered and found lacking in merit.

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, Casey, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, JJ., [946]*946concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

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

—Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which excluded certain payments in calculating his final average salary for retirement purposes.

In calculating petitioner’s final average salary, respondent excluded payments made in anticipation of retirement, payments as an early retirement incentive and payments for unused sick leave. This was neither irrational nor unreasonable and, accordingly, respondent’s determination must be upheld. Inclusion of such payments would result in an unjustified and improper inflation of petitioner’s final average salary as they are not a true reflection of petitioner’s employment history. Petitioner’s remaining contention has been considered and found lacking in merit.

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, Casey, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, JJ., [946]*946concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

202 A.D.2d 945, 610 N.Y.S.2d 98, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3077, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/corr-v-mccall-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack