Rivers v. New York City Department of Sanitation

49 A.D.3d 436, 854 N.Y.2d 64
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 20, 2008·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Contrary to petitioner’s contention, the court did not convert the cross motion to dismiss the petition for failure to state a cause of action into a motion for summary judgment without notice. Rather, the court, pursuant to CPLR 7804 (f), properly found that petitioner failed to state a legally cognizable cause of action that respondents acted arbitrarily, capriciously, or without a rational basis, where the record evidence establishes that the determination finding petitioner medically not qualified for the position of sanitation worker was rationally based upon the findings that she suffered from left ventricular hypertrophy and had elevated blood pressure. When arriving at its determination, respondents were entitled to rely on the conclusions of respondent Department of Sanitation’s medical director even in the face of conflicting opinions from petitioner’s physicians (see McCabe v Hoberman, 33 AD2d 547 [1969]; Matter of Winnegar v County of Suffolk, 13 AD3d 382 [2004]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Friedman, Nardelli, Catterson and Moskowitz, JJ. [See 2007 NY Slip Op 32740(U).]

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

Rivers v. New York City Department of Sanitation, 49 A.D.3d 436, 854 N.Y.2d 64 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

49 A.D.3d 436 (Rivers v. New York City Department of Sanitation) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Matter of Brown v. County of Nassau
186 N.Y.S.3d 253 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
Matter of Gagliano v. New York City Fire Dept.
2021 NY Slip Op 01196 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)