MATTER OF HOLBROOK v. State Ins. Fund
This text of 429 N.E.2d 420 (MATTER OF HOLBROOK v. State Ins. Fund) 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.
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
On review of the record here, we cannot say that respondents’ termination of petitioner was for “a constitutionally impermissible purpose or in violation of statutory proscription” (James v Board of Educ., 37 NY2d 891, 892). Moreover, the petitioner produced no evidence that the director of administration, the same officer who signed petitioner’s letter of appointment, was not authorized to sign his letter of termination.
Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.
Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
429 N.E.2d 420, 54 N.Y.2d 892, 444 N.Y.S.2d 913, 1981 N.Y. LEXIS 3095, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-holbrook-v-state-ins-fund-ny-1981.