Matter of Triola v. Daines

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Triola v. Daines

125 A.D.3d 676, 3 N.Y.S.3d 113

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

DecidedFebruary 4, 2015

Docket2013-02370

StatusPublished

This text of 125 A.D.3d 676 (Matter of Triola v. Daines) 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 Triola v. Daines, 125 A.D.3d 676, 3 N.Y.S.3d 113 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to review a determination of the New York State Department of Health dated July 30, 2010, which terminated the petitioner’s probationary employment as a senior medical conduct investigator, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Jones, Jr., J.), entered October 26, 2012, *677 which, upon a decision of the same court dated April 9, 2012, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

“The employment of a probationary employee may be terminated without a hearing and without a statement of reasons in the absence of a demonstration that the termination was in bad faith, for a constitutionally impermissible or an illegal purpose, or in violation of statutory or decisional law” (Matter of Lane v City of New York, 92 AD3d 786, 786 [2012]; see Matter of Swinton v Safir, 93 NY2d 758, 762-763 [1999]; Matter of York v McGuire, 63 NY2d 760, 761 [1984]; Matter of Capece v Schultz, 117 AD3d 1045, 1046 [2014]). Here, the petitioner failed to carry his burden of presenting competent proof that his termination was improper (see Matter of Lane v City of New York, 92 AD3d at 786-787; Matter of Deitch v City of New York, 90 AD3d 924 [2011]; Matter of Robinson v Health & Hosps. Corp., 29 AD3d 807, 809 [2006]). The record demonstrates that the petitioner’s performance was consistently unsatisfactory despite repeated advice and assistance designed to give him the opportunity to improve, and, thus, that his discharge was not made in bad faith (see Matter of Johnson v Katz, 68 NY2d 649, 650 [1986]; Matter of Goonewardena v State of N.Y. Workers’ Compensation Bd., 95 AD3d 638, 638 [2012]; Matter of Fichter v Egan, 223 AD2d 516 [1996]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition and dismissed this CPLR article 78 proceeding.

Skelos, J.R, Austin, Roman and LaSalle, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to review a determination of the New York State Department of Health dated July 30, 2010, which terminated the petitioner’s probationary employment as a senior medical conduct investigator, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Jones, Jr., J.), entered October 26, 2012, *677 which, upon a decision of the same court dated April 9, 2012, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

“The employment of a probationary employee may be terminated without a hearing and without a statement of reasons in the absence of a demonstration that the termination was in bad faith, for a constitutionally impermissible or an illegal purpose, or in violation of statutory or decisional law” (Matter of Lane v City of New York, 92 AD3d 786, 786 [2012]; see Matter of Swinton v Safir, 93 NY2d 758, 762-763 [1999]; Matter of York v McGuire, 63 NY2d 760, 761 [1984]; Matter of Capece v Schultz, 117 AD3d 1045, 1046 [2014]). Here, the petitioner failed to carry his burden of presenting competent proof that his termination was improper (see Matter of Lane v City of New York, 92 AD3d at 786-787; Matter of Deitch v City of New York, 90 AD3d 924 [2011]; Matter of Robinson v Health & Hosps. Corp., 29 AD3d 807, 809 [2006]). The record demonstrates that the petitioner’s performance was consistently unsatisfactory despite repeated advice and assistance designed to give him the opportunity to improve, and, thus, that his discharge was not made in bad faith (see Matter of Johnson v Katz, 68 NY2d 649, 650 [1986]; Matter of Goonewardena v State of N.Y. Workers’ Compensation Bd., 95 AD3d 638, 638 [2012]; Matter of Fichter v Egan, 223 AD2d 516 [1996]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition and dismissed this CPLR article 78 proceeding.

Skelos, J.R, Austin, Roman and LaSalle, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

125 A.D.3d 676, 3 N.Y.S.3d 113, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-triola-v-daines-nyappdiv-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack