Matter of Lissone v. Walcott

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Lissone v. Walcott

126 A.D.3d 582, 3 N.Y.S.3d 588

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

DecidedMarch 19, 2015

Docket14576 101433/12

StatusPublished

This text of 126 A.D.3d 582 (Matter of Lissone v. Walcott) 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

Matter of Lissone v. Walcott, 126 A.D.3d 582, 3 N.Y.S.3d 588 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Geoffrey D. Wright, J.), entered October 16, 2013, which denied petitioner’s motion to renew, unanimously affirmed, without costs, and the petition dismissed.

The court properly determined that there was no basis to annul respondents’ determination to discontinue petitioner’s probationary employment as an assistant principal. Petitioner failed to show that respondents’ determination, upon reinvestigation and reconsideration, was made in bad faith, in violation of lawful procedure, or for a constitutionally impermissible purpose (see Matter of Kolmel v City of New York, 88 AD3d 527, 528 [1st Dept 2011]; see also Matter of Witherspoon v Horn, 19 AD3d 250, 251 [1st Dept 2005]).

Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., DeGrasse, Richter and Feinman, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Geoffrey D. Wright, J.), entered October 16, 2013, which denied petitioner’s motion to renew, unanimously affirmed, without costs, and the petition dismissed.

The court properly determined that there was no basis to annul respondents’ determination to discontinue petitioner’s probationary employment as an assistant principal. Petitioner failed to show that respondents’ determination, upon reinvestigation and reconsideration, was made in bad faith, in violation of lawful procedure, or for a constitutionally impermissible purpose (see Matter of Kolmel v City of New York, 88 AD3d 527, 528 [1st Dept 2011]; see also Matter of Witherspoon v Horn, 19 AD3d 250, 251 [1st Dept 2005]).

Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., DeGrasse, Richter and Feinman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

126 A.D.3d 582, 3 N.Y.S.3d 588, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-lissone-v-walcott-nyappdiv-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack