McKinney v. Stolzenberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

McKinney v. Stolzenberg

294 A.D.2d 579, 742 N.Y.S.2d 577, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5527

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

DecidedMay 28, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 294 A.D.2d 579 (McKinney v. Stolzenberg) 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

McKinney v. Stolzenberg, 294 A.D.2d 579, 742 N.Y.S.2d 577, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5527 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination dated August 29, 2000, which, after a hearing, terminated the petitioner’s employment.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

The respondents’ determination that the petitioner was guilty of misconduct and incompetency in her position as a telecommunications operator is supported by substantial evidence in the record (see Matter of Lahey v Kelly, 71 NY2d 135; Matter of Decker v Scoralick, 209 AD2d 517). Moreover, the penalty of dismissal is not shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222). Ritter, J.P., Goldstein, Luciano and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

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

—Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination dated August 29, 2000, which, after a hearing, terminated the petitioner’s employment.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

The respondents’ determination that the petitioner was guilty of misconduct and incompetency in her position as a telecommunications operator is supported by substantial evidence in the record (see Matter of Lahey v Kelly, 71 NY2d 135; Matter of Decker v Scoralick, 209 AD2d 517). Moreover, the penalty of dismissal is not shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222). Ritter, J.P., Goldstein, Luciano and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

294 A.D.2d 579, 742 N.Y.S.2d 577, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5527, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mckinney-v-stolzenberg-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack