Meier v. Amico

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Meier v. Amico

51 A.D.2d 647, 377 N.Y.S.2d 836, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10993

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

DecidedJanuary 9, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 51 A.D.2d 647 (Meier v. Amico) 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

Meier v. Amico, 51 A.D.2d 647, 377 N.Y.S.2d 836, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10993 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: This proceeding seeks a determination of whether the actions of respondent Sheriff were arbitrary and capricious. The trial court reviewed the record of the hearing and reversed respondents’ decision, ordering petitioner reinstated. Since the Sheriff’s hearing was pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement and not a hearing "pursuant to direction by law” (CPLR 7803, subd 4), the trial court was not obliged to transfer the petition to the Appellate Division, but itself correctly determined the issues. (Appeal from judgment of Erie Supreme Court in article 78 proceeding to annul suspension and demotion.) Present—Cardamone, J. P., Simons, Mahoney, Goldman and Witmer, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: This proceeding seeks a determination of whether the actions of respondent Sheriff were arbitrary and capricious. The trial court reviewed the record of the hearing and reversed respondents’ decision, ordering petitioner reinstated. Since the Sheriff’s hearing was pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement and not a hearing "pursuant to direction by law” (CPLR 7803, subd 4), the trial court was not obliged to transfer the petition to the Appellate Division, but itself correctly determined the issues. (Appeal from judgment of Erie Supreme Court in article 78 proceeding to annul suspension and demotion.) Present—Cardamone, J. P., Simons, Mahoney, Goldman and Witmer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 A.D.2d 647, 377 N.Y.S.2d 836, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10993, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/meier-v-amico-nyappdiv-1976.