Goderre v. City of Peekskill

New York Court of Appeals

Goderre v. City of Peekskill

417 N.E.2d 565, 52 N.Y.2d 754, 436 N.Y.S.2d 272, 1980 N.Y. LEXIS 2853

DecidedDecember 16, 1980

StatusPublished

This text of 417 N.E.2d 565 (Goderre v. City of Peekskill) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Goderre v. City of Peekskill, 417 N.E.2d 565, 52 N.Y.2d 754, 436 N.Y.S.2d 272, 1980 N.Y. LEXIS 2853 (N.Y. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and the determination of respondents terminating petitioner’s employment by the City of Peekskill as a police officer should be reinstated, with costs.

We agree with Mr. Justice Charles Margett, dissenting below, that respondents’ determination is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. We add only that, though it would have been better practice for the hearing examiner to make specific findings and conclusions rather than, as he did, to quote extensively from the findings and conclusions of the Supreme Court Justice who tried the false arrest action against petitioner and the city, it is clear from the hearing transcript that the examiner was aware of the difference between the false arrest trial and the hearing before him and sought by questioning petitioner in relation to the Supreme Court findings simply to give petitioner the opportunity to offer any explanation and present any evidence he wished in relation to the arrest of Pedro Rivera.

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

Order reversed, with costs, and the determination of respondents reinstated in a memorandum. Question certified answered in the negative.

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 reversed and the determination of respondents terminating petitioner’s employment by the City of Peekskill as a police officer should be reinstated, with costs.

We agree with Mr. Justice Charles Margett, dissenting below, that respondents’ determination is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. We add only that, though it would have been better practice for the hearing examiner to make specific findings and conclusions rather than, as he did, to quote extensively from the findings and conclusions of the Supreme Court Justice who tried the false arrest action against petitioner and the city, it is clear from the hearing transcript that the examiner was aware of the difference between the false arrest trial and the hearing before him and sought by questioning petitioner in relation to the Supreme Court findings simply to give petitioner the opportunity to offer any explanation and present any evidence he wished in relation to the arrest of Pedro Rivera.

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

Order reversed, with costs, and the determination of respondents reinstated in a memorandum. Question certified answered in the negative.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

417 N.E.2d 565, 52 N.Y.2d 754, 436 N.Y.S.2d 272, 1980 N.Y. LEXIS 2853, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goderre-v-city-of-peekskill-ny-1980.