Johnson v. Katz

496 N.E.2d 223, 68 N.Y.2d 649, 505 N.Y.S.2d 64, 1986 N.Y. LEXIS 19041
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedJune 10, 1986
StatusPublished
Cited by113 cases

This text of 496 N.E.2d 223 (Johnson v. Katz) 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. Katz, 496 N.E.2d 223, 68 N.Y.2d 649, 505 N.Y.S.2d 64, 1986 N.Y. LEXIS 19041 (N.Y. 1986).

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

Judicial review of the determination to discharge this probationary employee is limited to an inquiry as to whether the termination was made in bad faith. Evidence in the record supporting the conclusion that performance was unsatisfactory establishes that the discharge was made in good faith (Matter of King v Sapier, 47 AD2d 114, 116, affd on opn below 38 NY2d 960; see, Matter of York v McGuire, 99 AD2d 1023, affd 63 NY2d 760; Matter of Matsa v Wallach, 42 AD2d 1004, 1005, affd 34 NY2d 891). Special Term had before it affidavits of petitioner’s supervisors detailing "continuing problems concerning her relationships with other staff’ and a meeting with petitioner at which such problems were discussed; a performance appraisal report prepared two months before her termination showing a comparatively low rating regarding her ability to communicate with staff and others; and petitioner’s own lengthy correspondence explaining various problems she had with fellow employees. In the face of such evidence establishing good faith in her termination, no material issue of fact was raised by petitioner’s disputed assertion that the facility deputy director told her she was being discharged to protect other employees from scheduled layoffs. Thus, no hearing of the issue of bad faith was required, and the petition was properly dismissed.

[651]*651Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Meyer, Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone and Hancock, Jr., concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

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

Related

Matter of Vijungco v. Metropolitan Transp. Auth.
2025 NY Slip Op 00495 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2025)
Matter of Terelle v. New York City Dept. of Educ.
194 N.Y.S.3d 45 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
Matter of Lin v. New York City Dept. of Educ.
2021 NY Slip Op 00627 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
Matter of Lake v. Town of Southold
2020 NY Slip Op 08064 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Matter of Russell v. New York State Ins. Fund
2020 NY Slip Op 1717 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Matter of Banton v. Brann
2020 NY Slip Op 1007 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Matter of Alleyne v. Department of Educ. of the City of N.Y.
2019 NY Slip Op 7321 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Matter of Solomon v. New York State Off. of Children & Family Servs.
2019 NY Slip Op 1692 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Matter of Brown v. Board of Educ. of the City Sch. Dist. of the City of N.Y.
2017 NY Slip Op 8624 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
Matter of Hirji v. Tahira Dupree Chase
2017 NY Slip Op 4843 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
Matter of Palmore v. Board of Educ. of Hempstead Union Free Sch. Dist.
2016 NY Slip Op 8973 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Matter of Thornton v. Saugerties Central School District
145 A.D.3d 1138 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Matter of Muller v. New York City Dept. of Educ.
142 A.D.3d 618 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Matter of Johnson v. County of Orange
138 A.D.3d 850 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Matter of Petkewicz v. Allers
137 A.D.3d 1045 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Matter of Rieser v. New York City Dept. of Educ.
133 A.D.3d 465 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Matter of Mendez v. New York City Dept. of Educ.
132 A.D.3d 533 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Matter of Almonte v. Department of Educ. of the City of N.Y.
132 A.D.3d 505 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Matter of Loren v. New York City Dept. of Educ.
126 A.D.3d 419 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Matter of Triola v. Daines
125 A.D.3d 676 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
496 N.E.2d 223, 68 N.Y.2d 649, 505 N.Y.S.2d 64, 1986 N.Y. LEXIS 19041, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-katz-ny-1986.