Gladstone v. Kelley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gladstone v. Kelley

52 A.D.2d 583, 382 N.Y.S.2d 537, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12168

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

DecidedApril 5, 1976

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 52 A.D.2d 583 (Gladstone v. Kelley) 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

Gladstone v. Kelley, 52 A.D.2d 583, 382 N.Y.S.2d 537, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12168 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 inter alia to review respondent’s determination, dated August 2, 1973, which found petitioner guilty of conduct unbecoming an officer and reduced him in rank, after a hearing. Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements. The evidence strongly supports the findings and the punishment imposed (see Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, 34 NY2d 222). There was no impropriety in respondent’s choice of the Chief of Detectives as the hearing officer. Although he was a member of the board of chiefs, the hearing officer had nothing to do with the preliminary proceedings relating to the charges and specifications. Special Term had ordered a hearing as to the possible involvement of the hearing officer in such preliminary proceedings and found that there had been none. Gulotta, P. J., Martuscello, Latham, Cohalan and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

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

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 inter alia to review respondent’s determination, dated August 2, 1973, which found petitioner guilty of conduct unbecoming an officer and reduced him in rank, after a hearing. Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements. The evidence strongly supports the findings and the punishment imposed (see Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, 34 NY2d 222). There was no impropriety in respondent’s choice of the Chief of Detectives as the hearing officer. Although he was a member of the board of chiefs, the hearing officer had nothing to do with the preliminary proceedings relating to the charges and specifications. Special Term had ordered a hearing as to the possible involvement of the hearing officer in such preliminary proceedings and found that there had been none. Gulotta, P. J., Martuscello, Latham, Cohalan and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

52 A.D.2d 583, 382 N.Y.S.2d 537, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12168, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gladstone-v-kelley-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack