Linzy v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Linzy v. New York City Transit Authority

125 A.D.2d 571, 510 N.Y.S.2d 2, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 62862

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

DecidedDecember 22, 1986

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 125 A.D.2d 571 (Linzy v. New York City Transit Authority) 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

Linzy v. New York City Transit Authority, 125 A.D.2d 571, 510 N.Y.S.2d 2, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 62862 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

— Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York City Transit Authority, dated April 16, 1985, which, after a hearing, found the petitioner guilty of refusing to obey the order of a supervisor and dismissed him from his position as a railroad clerk.

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

In view of the petitioner’s admission at the hearing that he refused to obey his supervisor’s order to provide a written statement concerning a prior incident, the Hearing Officer’s findings were supported by substantial evidence. In light of the petitioner’s extensive prior disciplinary record, the penalty imposed upon him was not so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness. Thompson, J. P., Rubin, Lawrence and Kunzeman, 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 New York City Transit Authority, dated April 16, 1985, which, after a hearing, found the petitioner guilty of refusing to obey the order of a supervisor and dismissed him from his position as a railroad clerk.

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

In view of the petitioner’s admission at the hearing that he refused to obey his supervisor’s order to provide a written statement concerning a prior incident, the Hearing Officer’s findings were supported by substantial evidence. In light of the petitioner’s extensive prior disciplinary record, the penalty imposed upon him was not so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness. Thompson, J. P., Rubin, Lawrence and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

125 A.D.2d 571, 510 N.Y.S.2d 2, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 62862, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/linzy-v-new-york-city-transit-authority-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack