Settle v. Board of Trustees

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Settle v. Board of Trustees

207 A.D.2d 493, 616 N.Y.S.2d 236, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8395

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

DecidedAugust 22, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 207 A.D.2d 493 (Settle v. Board of Trustees) 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

Settle v. Board of Trustees, 207 A.D.2d 493, 616 N.Y.S.2d 236, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8395 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Board of Trustees of the Village of Spring Valley, dated April 29, 1992, which, after a hearing, found the petitioner Walter Curtis Settle, Jr., guilty of misconduct and terminated his employment.

Adjudged that the petition is granted to the extent that the determination is annulled, on the law, without costs and disbursements.

Because the petitioner was entitled to proceed to arbitration (see, Matter of Policemen’s Benevolent Assn. v Rosenthal, 207 AD2d 492 [decided herewith]) and the Hearing Officer lacked jurisdiction to discipline the petitioner (see, Village Law § 8-800; Wiggins v Board of Educ., 60 NY2d 385, 387-388; Copeland v Salomon, 56 NY2d 222; 1978 Opn St Comp No. 78-665, at 130) the determination of the Board of Trustees was unauthorized. Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Ritter and Santucci, 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 Board of Trustees of the Village of Spring Valley, dated April 29, 1992, which, after a hearing, found the petitioner Walter Curtis Settle, Jr., guilty of misconduct and terminated his employment.

Adjudged that the petition is granted to the extent that the determination is annulled, on the law, without costs and disbursements.

Because the petitioner was entitled to proceed to arbitration (see, Matter of Policemen’s Benevolent Assn. v Rosenthal, 207 AD2d 492 [decided herewith]) and the Hearing Officer lacked jurisdiction to discipline the petitioner (see, Village Law § 8-800; Wiggins v Board of Educ., 60 NY2d 385, 387-388; Copeland v Salomon, 56 NY2d 222; 1978 Opn St Comp No. 78-665, at 130) the determination of the Board of Trustees was unauthorized. Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Ritter and Santucci, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

207 A.D.2d 493, 616 N.Y.S.2d 236, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8395, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/settle-v-board-of-trustees-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack