De Marco v. McLaughlin

New York Court of Appeals

De Marco v. McLaughlin

406 N.E.2d 441, 49 N.Y.2d 941, 428 N.Y.S.2d 624, 1980 N.Y. LEXIS 2291

New York Court of Appeals·Decided April 22, 1980·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

.The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs. The issue presented in petitioner’s article 78 proceeding was one of law on which the dissenting Judge disagreed. The appeal is, therefore, properly before us (CPLR 5601, subd [a], par [i]).

On the merits, there was evidence to support the determination of the courts below that petitioner’s resignation was voluntary and that the refusal of the city manager to reinstate him was not arbitrary or capricious.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum.

Order affirmed.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

.The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs. The issue presented in petitioner’s article 78 proceeding was one of law on which the dissenting Judge disagreed. The appeal is, therefore, properly before us (CPLR 5601, subd [a], par [i]).

On the merits, there was evidence to support the determination of the courts below that petitioner’s resignation was voluntary and that the refusal of the city manager to reinstate him was not arbitrary or capricious.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum.

Order affirmed.

De Marco v. McLaughlin, 406 N.E.2d 441, 49 N.Y.2d 941, 428 N.Y.S.2d 624, 1980 N.Y. LEXIS 2291 (N.Y. 1980).

Pincite

406 N.E.2d 441 (De Marco v. McLaughlin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related