Swakeen v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Swakeen v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.

39 A.D.3d 287, 834 N.Y.S.2d 113

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

DecidedApril 10, 2007

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 39 A.D.3d 287 (Swakeen v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.) 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

Swakeen v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp., 39 A.D.3d 287, 834 N.Y.S.2d 113 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marylin G. Diamond, J.), entered June 9, 2005, which denied the petition seeking to annul respondent New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation’s (HHC) Personnel Review Board affirmance of an administrative determination after hearing that petitioner was guilty of misconduct and should be suspended for 30 days, and granted respondent’s cross motion to dismiss this proceeding, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The administrative determination was neither irrational nor arbitrary and capricious (CPLR 7803 [3]). There was evidence that petitioner, an operating room technician employed by HHC, was absent from work for almost two hours and submitted altered documents during the fact-finding hearing in an effort to prove his presence during an operation. The Review Board properly concluded that the administrative law judge’s credibility determinations should not be disturbed, since “credibility determinations are the province of the Hearing Officer” (Matter of D'Augusta v Bratton, 259 AD2d 287, 288 [1999]). Concur— Saxe, J.E, Williams, Buckley, Catterson and Malone, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marylin G. Diamond, J.), entered June 9, 2005, which denied the petition seeking to annul respondent New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation’s (HHC) Personnel Review Board affirmance of an administrative determination after hearing that petitioner was guilty of misconduct and should be suspended for 30 days, and granted respondent’s cross motion to dismiss this proceeding, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The administrative determination was neither irrational nor arbitrary and capricious (CPLR 7803 [3]). There was evidence that petitioner, an operating room technician employed by HHC, was absent from work for almost two hours and submitted altered documents during the fact-finding hearing in an effort to prove his presence during an operation. The Review Board properly concluded that the administrative law judge’s credibility determinations should not be disturbed, since “credibility determinations are the province of the Hearing Officer” (Matter of D'Augusta v Bratton, 259 AD2d 287, 288 [1999]). Concur— Saxe, J.E, Williams, Buckley, Catterson and Malone, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 A.D.3d 287, 834 N.Y.S.2d 113, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/swakeen-v-new-york-city-health-hospitals-corp-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack