Tisdale v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Tisdale v. New York City Transit Authority

111 A.D.2d 821, 490 N.Y.S.2d 567, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50063

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

DecidedJune 10, 1985

StatusPublished

This text of 111 A.D.2d 821 (Tisdale v. New York City Transit Authority) 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

Tisdale v. New York City Transit Authority, 111 A.D.2d 821, 490 N.Y.S.2d 567, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50063 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York City Transit Authority, dated June 2, 1983, which, after a hearing, found petitioner guilty of misconduct and/or incompetence and dismissed him from his position as a bus operator.

Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.

The determination is supported by substantial evidence and the penalty imposed is not so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222), in view of the fact that petitioner was a bus driver and his use of narcotics would present a danger to the public. Mollen, P. J., Rubin, Lawrence and Kunzeman, 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 New York City Transit Authority, dated June 2, 1983, which, after a hearing, found petitioner guilty of misconduct and/or incompetence and dismissed him from his position as a bus operator.

Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.

The determination is supported by substantial evidence and the penalty imposed is not so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222), in view of the fact that petitioner was a bus driver and his use of narcotics would present a danger to the public. Mollen, P. J., Rubin, Lawrence and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 A.D.2d 821, 490 N.Y.S.2d 567, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50063, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tisdale-v-new-york-city-transit-authority-nyappdiv-1985.