Watson v. Bratton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Watson v. Bratton

243 A.D.2d 295, 664 N.Y.S.2d 518, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9649

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

DecidedOctober 9, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 243 A.D.2d 295 (Watson v. Bratton) 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

Watson v. Bratton, 243 A.D.2d 295, 664 N.Y.S.2d 518, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9649 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Huff, J.), entered February 6, 1996, which, inter alia, denied petitioner’s application brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 seeking to annul respondent’s determination terminating petitioner’s employment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner, a probationary employee, failed to demonstrate that his termination was based on a constitutionally impermissible reason, that it violated statutory or decisional law or that it was motivated by bad faith (Matter of York v McGuire, 63 NY2d 760). The New York State Department of Labor’s determination to grant petitioner’s claim for unemployment benefits is not dispositive of the issue raised herein (see, Matter of Rivoli v Stern, 160 AD2d 601). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin and Nardelli, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Huff, J.), entered February 6, 1996, which, inter alia, denied petitioner’s application brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 seeking to annul respondent’s determination terminating petitioner’s employment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner, a probationary employee, failed to demonstrate that his termination was based on a constitutionally impermissible reason, that it violated statutory or decisional law or that it was motivated by bad faith (Matter of York v McGuire, 63 NY2d 760). The New York State Department of Labor’s determination to grant petitioner’s claim for unemployment benefits is not dispositive of the issue raised herein (see, Matter of Rivoli v Stern, 160 AD2d 601). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin and Nardelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

243 A.D.2d 295, 664 N.Y.S.2d 518, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9649, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/watson-v-bratton-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack