Lumish v. Grant

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lumish v. Grant

255 A.D.2d 385, 679 N.Y.S.2d 702, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11826

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

DecidedNovember 9, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 255 A.D.2d 385 (Lumish v. Grant) 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

Lumish v. Grant, 255 A.D.2d 385, 679 N.Y.S.2d 702, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11826 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding [386]*386pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondents terminating the petitioner’s employment as Manager of Information Systems, effective October 11, 1997, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Nastasi, J.), entered March 27, 1998, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Based on the facts of this case, the court’s dismissal of the proceeding was not an abuse of discretion. Were we to review the merits of the petition, we would find that the determination was not arbitrary or capricious, but was supported by substantial evidence.

The petitioner’s remaining contention is without merit. Ritter, J. P., Thompson, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.

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

—In a proceeding [386]*386pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondents terminating the petitioner’s employment as Manager of Information Systems, effective October 11, 1997, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Nastasi, J.), entered March 27, 1998, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Based on the facts of this case, the court’s dismissal of the proceeding was not an abuse of discretion. Were we to review the merits of the petition, we would find that the determination was not arbitrary or capricious, but was supported by substantial evidence.

The petitioner’s remaining contention is without merit. Ritter, J. P., Thompson, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

255 A.D.2d 385, 679 N.Y.S.2d 702, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11826, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lumish-v-grant-nyappdiv-1998.