Heyman v. New York State Drug Abuse Control Commission

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Heyman v. New York State Drug Abuse Control Commission

60 A.D.2d 884, 401 N.Y.S.2d 163, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9931

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

DecidedJanuary 23, 1978

StatusPublished

This text of 60 A.D.2d 884 (Heyman v. New York State Drug Abuse Control Commission) 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

Heyman v. New York State Drug Abuse Control Commission, 60 A.D.2d 884, 401 N.Y.S.2d 163, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9931 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to compel respondents to reinstate petitioner to his position as an institution teacher at the Queensboro Rehabilitation Center, a facility of the New York State Drug Abuse Control Commission, the appeal, as limited by petitioner’s brief, is from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated May 4, 1976, as, after a hearing, dismissed so much of the petition as sought reinstatement with back pay. Judgment affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements, on the opinion of Mr. Justice Hyman at Special Term, dated January 14,1976. Martuscello, J. P., Rabin, Margett and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to compel respondents to reinstate petitioner to his position as an institution teacher at the Queensboro Rehabilitation Center, a facility of the New York State Drug Abuse Control Commission, the appeal, as limited by petitioner’s brief, is from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated May 4, 1976, as, after a hearing, dismissed so much of the petition as sought reinstatement with back pay. Judgment affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements, on the opinion of Mr. Justice Hyman at Special Term, dated January 14,1976. Martuscello, J. P., Rabin, Margett and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

60 A.D.2d 884, 401 N.Y.S.2d 163, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9931, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/heyman-v-new-york-state-drug-abuse-control-commission-nyappdiv-1978.