Ebling v. Town of Eden

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ebling v. Town of Eden

59 A.D.3d 978, 873 N.Y.S.2d 508

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

DecidedFebruary 6, 2009

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 59 A.D.3d 978 (Ebling v. Town of Eden) 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

Ebling v. Town of Eden, 59 A.D.3d 978, 873 N.Y.S.2d 508 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department by order of the Supreme Court, Erie County [Kevin M. Dillon, J.], entered July 18, 2008) to annul a determination of respondent. The determination terminated petitioner’s employment.

It is hereby ordered that the determination is unanimously confirmed without costs and the petition is dismissed.

Memorandum: Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking, inter alia, to annul the determination terminating him from employment following a hearing pursuant to Civil Service Law § 75. We reject petitioner’s contention [979]*979that the determination is not supported by substantial evidence (see generally 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 180-182 [1978]). Rather, we conclude that the evidence presented at the hearing included “such relevant proof as a reasonable mind may accept as adequate to support a conclusion or ultimate fact” (id. at 180). Contrary to the further contention of petitioner, he was not denied his right to a fair hearing by the admission of hearsay evidence (see generally Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]; Matter of Gates of Goodness & Mercy v Johnson, 49 AD3d 1295 [2008]). Present—Smith, J.P., Centra, Fahey, Peradotto and Pine, JJ.

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

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department by order of the Supreme Court, Erie County [Kevin M. Dillon, J.], entered July 18, 2008) to annul a determination of respondent. The determination terminated petitioner’s employment.

It is hereby ordered that the determination is unanimously confirmed without costs and the petition is dismissed.

Memorandum: Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking, inter alia, to annul the determination terminating him from employment following a hearing pursuant to Civil Service Law § 75. We reject petitioner’s contention [979]*979that the determination is not supported by substantial evidence (see generally 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 180-182 [1978]). Rather, we conclude that the evidence presented at the hearing included “such relevant proof as a reasonable mind may accept as adequate to support a conclusion or ultimate fact” (id. at 180). Contrary to the further contention of petitioner, he was not denied his right to a fair hearing by the admission of hearsay evidence (see generally Matter of Gray v Adduci, 73 NY2d 741, 742 [1988]; Matter of Gates of Goodness & Mercy v Johnson, 49 AD3d 1295 [2008]). Present—Smith, J.P., Centra, Fahey, Peradotto and Pine, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 A.D.3d 978, 873 N.Y.S.2d 508, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ebling-v-town-of-eden-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack