Keating v. City of Poughkeepsie

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Keating v. City of Poughkeepsie

237 A.D.2d 439, 656 N.Y.S.2d 733, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2535

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

DecidedMarch 17, 1997

StatusPublished

This text of 237 A.D.2d 439 (Keating v. City of Poughkeepsie) 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

Keating v. City of Poughkeepsie, 237 A.D.2d 439, 656 N.Y.S.2d 733, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2535 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent City of Poughkeepsie, dated May 11,1995, finding, after a hearing, that the petitioner was guilty of misconduct and terminating his employment as a sanitation worker.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed, on the merits, with costs.

Notwithstanding the petitioner’s claims to the contrary, the determination is supported by substantial evidence (see, 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 180; Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222, 230).

Moreover, given the circumstances of this case, we do not find that the penalty of termination is so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., supra, at 233; Matter of Foust [440]*440v Village of Port Chester, 211 AD2d 717, 718). Thompson, J. P., Sullivan, Pizzuto and Santucci, JJ., concur.

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

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent City of Poughkeepsie, dated May 11,1995, finding, after a hearing, that the petitioner was guilty of misconduct and terminating his employment as a sanitation worker.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed, on the merits, with costs.

Notwithstanding the petitioner’s claims to the contrary, the determination is supported by substantial evidence (see, 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 180; Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222, 230).

Moreover, given the circumstances of this case, we do not find that the penalty of termination is so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., supra, at 233; Matter of Foust [440]*440v Village of Port Chester, 211 AD2d 717, 718). Thompson, J. P., Sullivan, Pizzuto and Santucci, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

237 A.D.2d 439, 656 N.Y.S.2d 733, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2535, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/keating-v-city-of-poughkeepsie-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack