Monsees v. Monaghan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Monsees v. Monaghan

283 A.D. 1045, 131 N.Y.S.2d 668, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6229

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

DecidedJune 21, 1954

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 283 A.D. 1045 (Monsees v. Monaghan) 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

Monsees v. Monaghan, 283 A.D. 1045, 131 N.Y.S.2d 668, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6229 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1954).

Pincite

Opinion

The record is convincing on the charge of “neglect of duty ”, but the specifications of the charges based upon an indictment returned by the Kings County Grand Jury were not sustained. The order appealed from dismissing petitioner from the police department is, therefore, unanimously vacated. But as respondent represents that evidence is now available which will sustain the charges, the charges should not be dismissed or reinstatement of petitioner directed at this time. Respondent may hold another hearing, taking the new evidence upon the old charges, or may amend the charges or specifications. If respondent proceeds further against petitioner, the proceeding should be had with all dispatch. If further proceedings are not conducted promptly, petitioner may move to be restored to duty with back pay. Settle order' on notice. Present — Peck, P. J., Dore, Callahan, Breitel and Botein, JJ.

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

The record is convincing on the charge of “neglect of duty ”, but the specifications of the charges based upon an indictment returned by the Kings County Grand Jury were not sustained. The order appealed from dismissing petitioner from the police department is, therefore, unanimously vacated. But as respondent represents that evidence is now available which will sustain the charges, the charges should not be dismissed or reinstatement of petitioner directed at this time. Respondent may hold another hearing, taking the new evidence upon the old charges, or may amend the charges or specifications. If respondent proceeds further against petitioner, the proceeding should be had with all dispatch. If further proceedings are not conducted promptly, petitioner may move to be restored to duty with back pay. Settle order' on notice. Present — Peck, P. J., Dore, Callahan, Breitel and Botein, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

283 A.D. 1045, 131 N.Y.S.2d 668, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6229, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/monsees-v-monaghan-nyappdiv-1954.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack