Gioia v. New York City Department of Environmental Protection

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gioia v. New York City Department of Environmental Protection

267 A.D.2d 145, 700 N.Y.S.2d 183, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13243

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

DecidedDecember 21, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 267 A.D.2d 145 (Gioia v. New York City Department of Environmental Protection) 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

Gioia v. New York City Department of Environmental Protection, 267 A.D.2d 145, 700 N.Y.S.2d 183, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13243 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara Kapnick, J.), entered June 19, 1998, which dismissed as time-barred the petition pursuant to CPLR article 78 seeking petitioner’s reinstatement to his former position with respondent, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The IAS Court correctly determined that this proceeding seeking petitioner’s reinstatement to his former probationary position as construction laborer with respondent was time-barred, since petitioner failed to commence the proceeding within four months of his termination (Matter of De Milio v Borghard, 55 NY2d 216). In any case, petitioner, as a probationary employee, was terminable without a hearing at the discretion of respondent absent a showing that he was dismissed in violation of statutory or decisional law, or for unconstitutional [146]*146reasons (Matter of York v McGuire, 63 NY2d 760, 761), and no such showing has been made here. Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Williams, Mazzarelli, Wallach and Lerner, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara Kapnick, J.), entered June 19, 1998, which dismissed as time-barred the petition pursuant to CPLR article 78 seeking petitioner’s reinstatement to his former position with respondent, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The IAS Court correctly determined that this proceeding seeking petitioner’s reinstatement to his former probationary position as construction laborer with respondent was time-barred, since petitioner failed to commence the proceeding within four months of his termination (Matter of De Milio v Borghard, 55 NY2d 216). In any case, petitioner, as a probationary employee, was terminable without a hearing at the discretion of respondent absent a showing that he was dismissed in violation of statutory or decisional law, or for unconstitutional [146]*146reasons (Matter of York v McGuire, 63 NY2d 760, 761), and no such showing has been made here. Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Williams, Mazzarelli, Wallach and Lerner, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

267 A.D.2d 145, 700 N.Y.S.2d 183, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13243, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gioia-v-new-york-city-department-of-environmental-protection-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack