Lagenor v. Weed

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lagenor v. Weed

127 A.D.2d 970, 513 N.Y.S.2d 70, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 43455

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

DecidedFebruary 27, 1987

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 127 A.D.2d 970 (Lagenor v. Weed) 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

Lagenor v. Weed, 127 A.D.2d 970, 513 N.Y.S.2d 70, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 43455 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, defendants’ motions [971]*971granted and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: The complaint should be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action. The cause of action for wrongful discharge is without merit because plaintiff is an employee at will (O’Connor v Eastman Kodak Co., 65 NY2d 724). Plaintiff’s reliance upon the collective bargaining agreement to remove him from the status of an employee at will is misplaced. The agreement protects from discharge without just cause only those civil service employees covered by section 75 of the Civil Service Law. Plaintiff is not such an employee.

The cause of action against the union for denial of fair representation is without merit because, under the collective bargaining agreement, defendant has no meritorious grievance due to his discharge (see, Vaca v Sipes, 386 US 171, 191-192).

Finally, the cause of action for employer domination is one for an unfair labor practice, which is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Public Employee Relations Board (Civil Service Law § 205 [5] [d]; § 209-a [1]). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Kubiniec, J. — dismiss complaint.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Boomer, Green and Davis, JJ.

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

Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, defendants’ motions [971]*971granted and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: The complaint should be dismissed for failure to state a cause of action. The cause of action for wrongful discharge is without merit because plaintiff is an employee at will (O’Connor v Eastman Kodak Co., 65 NY2d 724). Plaintiff’s reliance upon the collective bargaining agreement to remove him from the status of an employee at will is misplaced. The agreement protects from discharge without just cause only those civil service employees covered by section 75 of the Civil Service Law. Plaintiff is not such an employee.

The cause of action against the union for denial of fair representation is without merit because, under the collective bargaining agreement, defendant has no meritorious grievance due to his discharge (see, Vaca v Sipes, 386 US 171, 191-192).

Finally, the cause of action for employer domination is one for an unfair labor practice, which is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Public Employee Relations Board (Civil Service Law § 205 [5] [d]; § 209-a [1]). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Kubiniec, J. — dismiss complaint.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Boomer, Green and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

127 A.D.2d 970, 513 N.Y.S.2d 70, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 43455, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lagenor-v-weed-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack