Hutchinson v. Lloyd

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hutchinson v. Lloyd

216 A.D.2d 3, 627 N.Y.S.2d 46, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5877

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

DecidedJune 1, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 216 A.D.2d 3 (Hutchinson v. Lloyd) 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

Hutchinson v. Lloyd, 216 A.D.2d 3, 627 N.Y.S.2d 46, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5877 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Petition seeking to annul the determination of respondent Commissioner of the Department of Sanitation dated April 12, 1993, finding petitioner guilty of violation of respondent’s Code of Conduct and terminating petitioner as the penalty for his misconduct (transferred to this Court by order of Supreme Court, New York County [Edward H. Lehner, J.], entered May 4, 1994), unanimously granted to the extent of vacating the penalty imposed and remanding the matter to respondent for the imposition of a lesser penalty and the determination is otherwise confirmed, without costs.

In the circumstances, we find the penalty of termination for an altercation with a civilian to be so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see, Matter [4]*4of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222). The record reflects that the incident was precipitated by the conduct of the complaining civilian. We further note the presence of the complainant’s cousin at the scene. In addition thereto, we find that the petitioner’s pre-rehabilitation dependency related misconduct and absenteeism should not have been taken into account in determining the penalty herein. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Rubin, Kupferman, Asch and Nardelli, JJ.

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

Petition seeking to annul the determination of respondent Commissioner of the Department of Sanitation dated April 12, 1993, finding petitioner guilty of violation of respondent’s Code of Conduct and terminating petitioner as the penalty for his misconduct (transferred to this Court by order of Supreme Court, New York County [Edward H. Lehner, J.], entered May 4, 1994), unanimously granted to the extent of vacating the penalty imposed and remanding the matter to respondent for the imposition of a lesser penalty and the determination is otherwise confirmed, without costs.

In the circumstances, we find the penalty of termination for an altercation with a civilian to be so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see, Matter [4]*4of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222). The record reflects that the incident was precipitated by the conduct of the complaining civilian. We further note the presence of the complainant’s cousin at the scene. In addition thereto, we find that the petitioner’s pre-rehabilitation dependency related misconduct and absenteeism should not have been taken into account in determining the penalty herein. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Rubin, Kupferman, Asch and Nardelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

216 A.D.2d 3, 627 N.Y.S.2d 46, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5877, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hutchinson-v-lloyd-nyappdiv-1995.