Johnson v. Board of Trustees of the Middle Island Public Library

New York Court of Appeals

Johnson v. Board of Trustees of the Middle Island Public Library

463 N.E.2d 1224, 61 N.Y.2d 1014, 475 N.Y.S.2d 372, 1984 N.Y. LEXIS 4232

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 29, 1984

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 463 N.E.2d 1224 (Johnson v. Board of Trustees of the Middle Island Public Library) 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

Johnson v. Board of Trustees of the Middle Island Public Library, 463 N.E.2d 1224, 61 N.Y.2d 1014, 475 N.Y.S.2d 372, 1984 N.Y. LEXIS 4232 (N.Y. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The judgment of the Appellate Division should be modified by remitting the matter to Supreme Court, Suffolk [1016]*1016County, for the purpose of determining back pay, if any, due petitioner, and, as so modified, affirmed, with costs to respondent.

There is substantial evidence to support the board’s determination sustaining the charges against petitioner of misconduct and incompetence. Furthermore, we agree with the Appellate Division that the sanction of dismissal is not excessive under the circumstances and does not constitute an abuse of discretion (see Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222; Matter of Short v Nassau County Civ. Serv. Comm., 45 NY2d 721).

Respondent concedes that petitioner is entitled to back pay for the period of his suspension exceeding 30 days, offset by earnings from other employment and unemployment benefits and by deductions for periods of delay for which petitioner is responsible (Civil Service Law, § 75, subd 3; Gerber v New York City Housing Auth., 42 NY2d 162, 164-165). Factual issues remain as to whether petitioner is responsible for any delay in the disposition of the charges and as to any earnings petitioner made from other employment or unemployment benefits, and a hearing is therefore necessary.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Meyer, Simons and Kaye concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), judgment modified, with costs to respondent, and matter remitted to Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum herein and, as so modified, affirmed.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The judgment of the Appellate Division should be modified by remitting the matter to Supreme Court, Suffolk [1016]*1016County, for the purpose of determining back pay, if any, due petitioner, and, as so modified, affirmed, with costs to respondent.

There is substantial evidence to support the board’s determination sustaining the charges against petitioner of misconduct and incompetence. Furthermore, we agree with the Appellate Division that the sanction of dismissal is not excessive under the circumstances and does not constitute an abuse of discretion (see Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222; Matter of Short v Nassau County Civ. Serv. Comm., 45 NY2d 721).

Respondent concedes that petitioner is entitled to back pay for the period of his suspension exceeding 30 days, offset by earnings from other employment and unemployment benefits and by deductions for periods of delay for which petitioner is responsible (Civil Service Law, § 75, subd 3; Gerber v New York City Housing Auth., 42 NY2d 162, 164-165). Factual issues remain as to whether petitioner is responsible for any delay in the disposition of the charges and as to any earnings petitioner made from other employment or unemployment benefits, and a hearing is therefore necessary.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Meyer, Simons and Kaye concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), judgment modified, with costs to respondent, and matter remitted to Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum herein and, as so modified, affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

463 N.E.2d 1224, 61 N.Y.2d 1014, 475 N.Y.S.2d 372, 1984 N.Y. LEXIS 4232, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-board-of-trustees-of-the-middle-island-public-library-ny-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack