Muniz v. Giuliani

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Muniz v. Giuliani

282 A.D.2d 246, 723 N.Y.S.2d 351, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3495

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

DecidedApril 10, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 282 A.D.2d 246 (Muniz v. Giuliani) 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

Muniz v. Giuliani, 282 A.D.2d 246, 723 N.Y.S.2d 351, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3495 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Determination of respondent Police Commissioner, dated November 7, 1995, suspending petitioner police officer for 20 days, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Michael Stallman, J.], entered December 17, 1999), dismissed, without costs.

Substantial evidence, including petitioner’s own testimony, supports the finding that petitioner continued to argue with his desk sergeant after the sergeant had instructed him to leave the precinct house following the morning roll call and the assignment of duties. The penalty does not shock our sense of fairness. We have considered and rejected petitioner’s other arguments. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Williams, Andrias, Rubin and Friedman, JJ.

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

—Determination of respondent Police Commissioner, dated November 7, 1995, suspending petitioner police officer for 20 days, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Michael Stallman, J.], entered December 17, 1999), dismissed, without costs.

Substantial evidence, including petitioner’s own testimony, supports the finding that petitioner continued to argue with his desk sergeant after the sergeant had instructed him to leave the precinct house following the morning roll call and the assignment of duties. The penalty does not shock our sense of fairness. We have considered and rejected petitioner’s other arguments. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Williams, Andrias, Rubin and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

282 A.D.2d 246, 723 N.Y.S.2d 351, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3495, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/muniz-v-giuliani-nyappdiv-2001.