Schurr v. Wingate

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Schurr v. Wingate

243 A.D.2d 571, 663 N.Y.S.2d 116, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9821

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

DecidedOctober 14, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 243 A.D.2d 571 (Schurr v. Wingate) 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

Schurr v. Wingate, 243 A.D.2d 571, 663 N.Y.S.2d 116, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9821 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Commissioner of the Suffolk County Department of Social Services, dated April 1, 1996, which, after a hearing, terminated the petitioner’s employment as a security guard.

Adjudged that the petition is granted to the extent that the determination with respect to Specification 34 is annulled, and that charge is dismissed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the determination is otherwise confirmed, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits.

In order to annul an administrative determination made after a hearing, a court must conclude that the record lacks substantial evidence to support the determination (see, Matter of Lahey v Kelly, 71 NY2d 135, 140; Matter of LaCanfora v Lloyd, 229 AD2d 496). Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the hearing record amply supports the Commissioner’s finding that he committed numerous acts of misconduct, which included refusing to assist fellow security guards and Social Services employees on three occasions when threatening situations arose. Although the petitioner denied that he had failed to provide assistance in situations involving potential danger to others, the charges were supported by the testimony of a number of witnesses, and it is well settled that a reviewing court may not weigh the evidence or reject the credibility determination made by the Hearing Officer where there is conflicting evidence and room for choice exists (see, Matter of LaCanfora v Lloyd, 229 AD2d 496, supra; Matter of McQueeney v Dutchess County Sheriff, 223 AD2d 711).

However, the Commissioner’s determination with respect to Specification 34, which alleged that the petitioner had engaged in insubordinate conduct on March 7, 1994, must be annulled since this charge was withdrawn by the respondents during the hearing.

Finally, the penalty of dismissal was not so disproportionate to the offenses as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see, [572]*572Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222; Matter of Parker v Blauvelt Volunteer Fire Co., 222 AD2d 437). Rosenblatt, J. P., Copertino, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Commissioner of the Suffolk County Department of Social Services, dated April 1, 1996, which, after a hearing, terminated the petitioner’s employment as a security guard.

Adjudged that the petition is granted to the extent that the determination with respect to Specification 34 is annulled, and that charge is dismissed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the determination is otherwise confirmed, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits.

In order to annul an administrative determination made after a hearing, a court must conclude that the record lacks substantial evidence to support the determination (see, Matter of Lahey v Kelly, 71 NY2d 135, 140; Matter of LaCanfora v Lloyd, 229 AD2d 496). Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the hearing record amply supports the Commissioner’s finding that he committed numerous acts of misconduct, which included refusing to assist fellow security guards and Social Services employees on three occasions when threatening situations arose. Although the petitioner denied that he had failed to provide assistance in situations involving potential danger to others, the charges were supported by the testimony of a number of witnesses, and it is well settled that a reviewing court may not weigh the evidence or reject the credibility determination made by the Hearing Officer where there is conflicting evidence and room for choice exists (see, Matter of LaCanfora v Lloyd, 229 AD2d 496, supra; Matter of McQueeney v Dutchess County Sheriff, 223 AD2d 711).

However, the Commissioner’s determination with respect to Specification 34, which alleged that the petitioner had engaged in insubordinate conduct on March 7, 1994, must be annulled since this charge was withdrawn by the respondents during the hearing.

Finally, the penalty of dismissal was not so disproportionate to the offenses as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see, [572]*572Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222; Matter of Parker v Blauvelt Volunteer Fire Co., 222 AD2d 437). Rosenblatt, J. P., Copertino, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

243 A.D.2d 571, 663 N.Y.S.2d 116, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9821, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schurr-v-wingate-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack