Kercado v. Ward

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kercado v. Ward

166 A.D.2d 280

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

DecidedOctober 16, 1990

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 166 A.D.2d 280 (Kercado v. Ward) 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

Kercado v. Ward, 166 A.D.2d 280 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Herbert Cahn, J.), entered July 17, 1989, which, inter alia, dismissed petitioner’s CPLR article 78 petition seeking to annul the Police Commissioner’s determination, dated August 31, 1987, denying him promotion to the rank of sergeant, is unanimously affirmed, without costs. The appeal from the order of the same court, entered February 13, 1990, denying petitioner’s motion for leave to reargue, is unanimously dismissed as nonappealable, without costs.

[281]*281Petitioner, who passed an examination for promotion to sergeant and was certified as an eligible candidate for the position, was "passed over” three times by the Commissioner in light of a pending internal investigation into a complaint alleging petitioner’s involvement with drug dealing. The complaint eventually proved to be unfounded and the Commissioner restored petitioner to the eligible list. However, the eligibility list expired shortly thereafter and petitioner was never reconsidered for promotion.

The record is devoid of substantive proof supporting petitioner’s claim that the Commissioner’s decision was arbitrary and capricious. The record does not reveal that the complaint involved was either false on its face, or that the Police Department was dilatory in its investigation of the complaint. Moreover, we find the Commissioner’s decision to pass over petitioner for a promotion while the complaint was being investigated was a reasonable exercise of discretion in view of the nature of the complaint.

Furthermore, contrary to petitioner’s arguments, the Court of Appeals decision in Matter of Deas v Levitt (73 NY2d 525), which was handed down while this matter was sub judice, is controlling.

We have considered petitioner’s remaining points and find them to be without merit. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Ross, Carro, Asch and Ellerin, JJ.

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

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Herbert Cahn, J.), entered July 17, 1989, which, inter alia, dismissed petitioner’s CPLR article 78 petition seeking to annul the Police Commissioner’s determination, dated August 31, 1987, denying him promotion to the rank of sergeant, is unanimously affirmed, without costs. The appeal from the order of the same court, entered February 13, 1990, denying petitioner’s motion for leave to reargue, is unanimously dismissed as nonappealable, without costs.

[281]*281Petitioner, who passed an examination for promotion to sergeant and was certified as an eligible candidate for the position, was "passed over” three times by the Commissioner in light of a pending internal investigation into a complaint alleging petitioner’s involvement with drug dealing. The complaint eventually proved to be unfounded and the Commissioner restored petitioner to the eligible list. However, the eligibility list expired shortly thereafter and petitioner was never reconsidered for promotion.

The record is devoid of substantive proof supporting petitioner’s claim that the Commissioner’s decision was arbitrary and capricious. The record does not reveal that the complaint involved was either false on its face, or that the Police Department was dilatory in its investigation of the complaint. Moreover, we find the Commissioner’s decision to pass over petitioner for a promotion while the complaint was being investigated was a reasonable exercise of discretion in view of the nature of the complaint.

Furthermore, contrary to petitioner’s arguments, the Court of Appeals decision in Matter of Deas v Levitt (73 NY2d 525), which was handed down while this matter was sub judice, is controlling.

We have considered petitioner’s remaining points and find them to be without merit. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Ross, Carro, Asch and Ellerin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

166 A.D.2d 280, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kercado-v-ward-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack