Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/Graham v. Henderson

Graham v. Henderson

158 A.D.2d 911, 551 N.Y.S.2d 79, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1403
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 2, 1990
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 158 A.D.2d 911 (Graham v. Henderson) 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
Graham v. Henderson, 158 A.D.2d 911, 551 N.Y.S.2d 79, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1403 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Opinion

There is no merit to petitioner’s contention that the Hearing Officer did not preside in an impartial manner or that [912]*912certain charges were filed in retaliation. We find that the determination was supported by substantial evidence. The remaining issues set forth in the petition and rejected by Supreme Court have not been raised on appeal, and thus those issues have been waived (see, Velte v Jainew Enters., 122 AD2d 544). (Article 78 proceeding transferred by order of Supreme Court, Cayuga County, Contiguglia, J.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Denman, Green, Balio and Lawton, JJ.

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

Related

Talley v. Walker
203 A.D.2d 924 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
Comfort v. Irvin
197 A.D.2d 907 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
158 A.D.2d 911, 551 N.Y.S.2d 79, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1403, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/graham-v-henderson-nyappdiv-1990.