Ripp v. Kelly

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ripp v. Kelly

4 A.D.3d 144, 771 N.Y.S.2d 352, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1227

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

DecidedFebruary 10, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 4 A.D.3d 144 (Ripp v. Kelly) 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

Ripp v. Kelly, 4 A.D.3d 144, 771 N.Y.S.2d 352, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1227 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Determination of respondent Commissioner, dated April 26, 2002, finding petitioner guilty of specified misconduct and imposing upon petitioner a forfeiture of 20 vacation days, [145]*145unanimously 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 [Lewis Stone, J.], entered December 12, 2002) dismissed, without costs.

Substantial evidence, including the testimony of several of petitioner’s superiors, supports respondents’ findings that petitioner was, inter alia, insubordinate and dishonest in his attempts to avoid the patrol duty assigned him (see Matter of Edwards v Safir, 282 AD2d 287 [2001]). The penalty imposed is not shocking to our sense of fairness (see Matter of Kelly v Safir, 96 NY2d 32, 39-40 [2001]). Concur—Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Ellerin and Friedman, JJ.

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

Determination of respondent Commissioner, dated April 26, 2002, finding petitioner guilty of specified misconduct and imposing upon petitioner a forfeiture of 20 vacation days, [145]*145unanimously 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 [Lewis Stone, J.], entered December 12, 2002) dismissed, without costs.

Substantial evidence, including the testimony of several of petitioner’s superiors, supports respondents’ findings that petitioner was, inter alia, insubordinate and dishonest in his attempts to avoid the patrol duty assigned him (see Matter of Edwards v Safir, 282 AD2d 287 [2001]). The penalty imposed is not shocking to our sense of fairness (see Matter of Kelly v Safir, 96 NY2d 32, 39-40 [2001]). Concur—Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Ellerin and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 A.D.3d 144, 771 N.Y.S.2d 352, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1227, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ripp-v-kelly-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack