Nedd v. Carter

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Nedd v. Carter

206 A.D.2d 748, 614 N.Y.S.2d 940, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7502

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

DecidedJuly 21, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 206 A.D.2d 748 (Nedd v. Carter) 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

Nedd v. Carter, 206 A.D.2d 748, 614 N.Y.S.2d 940, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7502 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Appellate Division, Second Department) to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Westchester County Hospitals which terminated petitioner’s employment.

The issue in this proceeding is whether there is substantial evidence to support the finding of misconduct made against petitioner. Petitioner, a food service operator, was found guilty of, inter alia, stealing. In our view, the determination is supported by substantial evidence and accordingly should be confirmed. Petitioner’s arguments to the contrary center around questions of credibility which were for the Hearing Officer to resolve.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Crew III, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

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

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Appellate Division, Second Department) to review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Westchester County Hospitals which terminated petitioner’s employment.

The issue in this proceeding is whether there is substantial evidence to support the finding of misconduct made against petitioner. Petitioner, a food service operator, was found guilty of, inter alia, stealing. In our view, the determination is supported by substantial evidence and accordingly should be confirmed. Petitioner’s arguments to the contrary center around questions of credibility which were for the Hearing Officer to resolve.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Crew III, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

206 A.D.2d 748, 614 N.Y.S.2d 940, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7502, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nedd-v-carter-nyappdiv-1994.