Prestia v. Brown

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Prestia v. Brown

191 A.D.2d 224, 595 N.Y.S.2d 678

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

DecidedMarch 9, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 191 A.D.2d 224 (Prestia v. Brown) 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

Prestia v. Brown, 191 A.D.2d 224, 595 N.Y.S.2d 678 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Martin Stecher, J.), entered January 8, 1992, which, inter alia, granted respondent’s cross-motion to dismiss the within petition brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 seeking petitioner’s reinstatement as a police officer, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

[225]*225Since petitioner’s claim that he was dismissed in bad faith rests on a misinterpretation of the stipulation placing petitioner on probation, the cross-motion to dismiss the petition was properly granted. To settle charges brought against him, petitioner agreed to be placed on Disciplinary Probation for one year, and that the Commissioner could impose punishment of dismissal during that period. Petitioner was dismissed prior to the expiration of the period of probation based upon separate charges, brought subsequent to the stipulation. Accordingly, the petition was properly dismissed. Concur — Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Asch and Rubin, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Martin Stecher, J.), entered January 8, 1992, which, inter alia, granted respondent’s cross-motion to dismiss the within petition brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 seeking petitioner’s reinstatement as a police officer, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

[225]*225Since petitioner’s claim that he was dismissed in bad faith rests on a misinterpretation of the stipulation placing petitioner on probation, the cross-motion to dismiss the petition was properly granted. To settle charges brought against him, petitioner agreed to be placed on Disciplinary Probation for one year, and that the Commissioner could impose punishment of dismissal during that period. Petitioner was dismissed prior to the expiration of the period of probation based upon separate charges, brought subsequent to the stipulation. Accordingly, the petition was properly dismissed. Concur — Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Asch and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

191 A.D.2d 224, 595 N.Y.S.2d 678, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/prestia-v-brown-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack