Matter of Di Vito v. State of New York, Dep't of Labor

399 N.E.2d 542, 48 N.Y.2d 761, 423 N.Y.S.2d 655, 1979 N.Y. LEXIS 2419
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedNovember 13, 1979
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 399 N.E.2d 542 (Matter of Di Vito v. State of New York, Dep't of Labor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Matter of Di Vito v. State of New York, Dep't of Labor, 399 N.E.2d 542, 48 N.Y.2d 761, 423 N.Y.S.2d 655, 1979 N.Y. LEXIS 2419 (N.Y. 1979).

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with *763 costs. Petitioner’s "persistent unwillingness to accept the directives of his superiors” clearly supports the finding of insubordination (Matter of Short v Nassau County Civ. Serv. Comm., 45 NY2d 721, 723). Moreover, in cases involving internal discipline as distinct from external regulation the administrative agency has a discretion of broader range because of "the complexity and sensitiveness of personnel administration in continuing intraorganizational relationships” (Matter of Ahsaf v Nyquist, 37 NY2d 182, 185).

Against that background the sentence in the Appellate Division memorandum suggesting that petitioner’s obduracy "casts serious doubt over his ability to hold a managerial position”, to which petitioner points, furnishes no basis for appeal. Far from importing into the proceeding incompetence, a charge never made by the department, it related, and was germane, to the severity of punishment. Nor in view of the broad discretion accorded the department in such matters can we say that the penalty it imposed, though severe, was " 'shocking to one’s sense of fairness’ ” (Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222, 233). The department had the right in fixing the penalty to consider, among other things, that petitioner’s intransigence prolonged the impasse between him and the employees under him to the detriment of its work.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum.

Order affirmed.

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

Related

Wagner v. Roth
9 A.D.3d 583 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Brey v. Board of Education
245 A.D.2d 613 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Weatherlow v. Board of Education of Jamestown City School District
236 A.D.2d 855 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Crossman-Battisti v. Traficanti
235 A.D.2d 566 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Parker v. Blauvelt Volunteer Fire Co.
222 A.D.2d 437 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
Calloway v. Glass
203 A.D.2d 800 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
Case v. Fleming
189 A.D.2d 1070 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
Plante v. Buono
172 A.D.2d 81 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
O'Malley v. Nassau County Medical Center
143 A.D.2d 426 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)
Felski v. Larson
139 A.D.2d 967 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)
Leotta v. Hasl
134 A.D.2d 429 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1987)
Clarke v. Board of Education
105 A.D.2d 893 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)
Koch v. Webster Central School District Board of Education
443 N.E.2d 951 (New York Court of Appeals, 1982)
Koch v. Webster Central School District Board of Education
89 A.D.2d 778 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)
Palmer v. County of Oneida
86 A.D.2d 957 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)
Pilawa v. City of Utica
76 A.D.2d 103 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1980)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
399 N.E.2d 542, 48 N.Y.2d 761, 423 N.Y.S.2d 655, 1979 N.Y. LEXIS 2419, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-di-vito-v-state-of-new-york-dept-of-labor-ny-1979.