Doino v. Laehy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Doino v. Laehy

100 A.D.2d 744, 473 N.Y.S.2d 626, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17753

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

DecidedMarch 6, 1984

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 100 A.D.2d 744 (Doino v. Laehy) 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

Doino v. Laehy, 100 A.D.2d 744, 473 N.Y.S.2d 626, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17753 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously reversed, without costs, determination confirmed and petition dismissed. Memorandum: Judicial review of a penalty imposed by an administrative agency is limited to determining whether the punishment is “ ‘ “so disproportionate to the offense, in the light of all the circumstances, as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness”.’ [citations omitted]” (Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222, 233). In view of the serious nature of petitioner’s misconduct, the penalty of dismissal cannot be said to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Francis, J. — art 78.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Denman, Boomer, O’Donnell and Schnepp, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously reversed, without costs, determination confirmed and petition dismissed. Memorandum: Judicial review of a penalty imposed by an administrative agency is limited to determining whether the punishment is “ ‘ “so disproportionate to the offense, in the light of all the circumstances, as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness”.’ [citations omitted]” (Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222, 233). In view of the serious nature of petitioner’s misconduct, the penalty of dismissal cannot be said to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Francis, J. — art 78.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Denman, Boomer, O’Donnell and Schnepp, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

100 A.D.2d 744, 473 N.Y.S.2d 626, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17753, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/doino-v-laehy-nyappdiv-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack