Respass v. Ward

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Respass v. Ward

158 A.D.2d 331, 551 N.Y.S.2d 20, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1222

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

DecidedFebruary 8, 1990

StatusPublished

This text of 158 A.D.2d 331 (Respass v. Ward) 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

Respass v. Ward, 158 A.D.2d 331, 551 N.Y.S.2d 20, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1222 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

We find that there was substantial evidence in the record to support the Commissioner’s determination that petitioner, while. off duty and engaged in private conversation with complainants, wrongfully struck them with a pipe and also improperly pointed his off-duty revolver at them (see, 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176). In view of petitioner having been previously disciplined for failure to, in part, obey a superior’s order on two separate occasions and considering his instant offenses, the sanction of dismissal was not so disproportionate as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222). Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Milonas, Asch, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.

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

We find that there was substantial evidence in the record to support the Commissioner’s determination that petitioner, while. off duty and engaged in private conversation with complainants, wrongfully struck them with a pipe and also improperly pointed his off-duty revolver at them (see, 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176). In view of petitioner having been previously disciplined for failure to, in part, obey a superior’s order on two separate occasions and considering his instant offenses, the sanction of dismissal was not so disproportionate as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222). Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Milonas, Asch, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

158 A.D.2d 331, 551 N.Y.S.2d 20, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1222, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/respass-v-ward-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack