Hernandez v. Sielaff

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hernandez v. Sielaff

209 A.D.2d 284, 619 N.Y.S.2d 540

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

DecidedNovember 17, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 209 A.D.2d 284 (Hernandez v. Sielaff) 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

Hernandez v. Sielaff, 209 A.D.2d 284, 619 N.Y.S.2d 540 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Seymour Schwartz, J.), entered April 21, 1993, which granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Each cause of action asserted in the complaint arises out of the allegedly improper interrogation of plaintiff by his superiors on October 22, 1991. Plaintiff’s collective bargaining agreement defines a "grievance” to specifically include violations of interrogation procedures, and since plaintiff waived his right to seek judicial resolution of such conflicts as a condition of employment pursuant to article XXI (§§ 3 and 11) of the collective bargaining agreement, the complaint was properly [285]*285dismissed. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Wallach, Ross, Rubin and Williams, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Seymour Schwartz, J.), entered April 21, 1993, which granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Each cause of action asserted in the complaint arises out of the allegedly improper interrogation of plaintiff by his superiors on October 22, 1991. Plaintiff’s collective bargaining agreement defines a "grievance” to specifically include violations of interrogation procedures, and since plaintiff waived his right to seek judicial resolution of such conflicts as a condition of employment pursuant to article XXI (§§ 3 and 11) of the collective bargaining agreement, the complaint was properly [285]*285dismissed. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Wallach, Ross, Rubin and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

209 A.D.2d 284, 619 N.Y.S.2d 540, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hernandez-v-sielaff-nyappdiv-1994.