Matter of Hassan v. New York City Civ. Serv. Commn.

2025 NY Slip Op 03134
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 22, 2025·No. Index No. 157672/22; Appeal No. 4419; Case No. 2024-02264·Published

Opinion

Matter of Hassan v New York City Civ. Serv. Commn. (2025 NY Slip Op 03134)
Matter of Hassan v New York City Civ. Serv. Commn.
2025 NY Slip Op 03134
Decided on May 22, 2025
Appellate Division, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided and Entered: May 22, 2025
Before: Webber, J.P., Moulton, Friedman, Gesmer, Michael, JJ.

Index No. 157672/22|Appeal No. 4419|Case No. 2024-02264|

[*1]In the Matter of Mirmohammad Hassan, Petitioner-Appellant,

v

New York City Civil Service Commission, et al., Respondents-Respondents.


Kousoulas & Associates PC, New York (Antonia Kousoulas of counsel), for appellant.

Muriel Goode-Trufant, Corporation Counsel, New York (Janet L. Zaleon of counsel), for respondents.



Order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Latin, J.), entered on or about March 4, 2024, which denied the petition to annul a determination of respondent New York City Civil Service Commission (CSC), dated May 13, 2022, affirming a determination of respondent New York City Police Department (NYPD) terminating petitioner's employment following a disciplinary hearing in absentia, granted respondents' cross-motion to dismiss the petition, and dismissed the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner's constitutional arguments, which are his only arguments reviewable under the "extremely narrow scope of review applicable" to CSC determinations (Matter of Centeno v City of New York, 115 AD3d 537, 538 [1st Dept 2014]), are unpreserved. In his brief before the CSC, petitioner "never protested that [his] constitutional rights were being violated," and "[t]his Court has 'no discretionary authority' to 'reach[] an unpreserved issue in the interest of justice' in an article 78 proceeding . . . including issues touching on due process" (Matter of Almanzar v N. Y. City Civ. Serv. Commn., 166 AD3d 522, 524 [1st Dept 2018], quoting Matter of Khan v New York State Dept. of Health, 96 NY2d 879, 880 [2001]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: May 22, 2025



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

Matter of Hassan v. New York City Civ. Serv. Commn., 2025 NY Slip Op 03134 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2025).

2025 NY Slip Op 03134 (Matter of Hassan v. New York City Civ. Serv. Commn.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Khan v. New York State Department of Health
756 N.E.2d 71 (New York Court of Appeals, 2001)
Centeno v. City of New York
115 A.D.3d 537 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)