Wright v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wright v. City of New York

192 A.D.2d 411, 596 N.Y.S.2d 372

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

DecidedApril 20, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 192 A.D.2d 411 (Wright v. City of New York) 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

Wright v. City of New York, 192 A.D.2d 411, 596 N.Y.S.2d 372 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Martin Schoenfeld, J.), entered March 11, 1992, which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to annul respondents’ determination terminating petitioner as a Correction Officer, denied the application and dismissed the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In settlement of disciplinary charges brought against him, petitioner agreed to be placed on disciplinary probation for a period of one year subject to termination "as any other probationary employee would be”. Thus, eight months later, when respondent Department terminated petitioner based upon new charges arising out of subsequent occurring incidents, petitioner was entitled to neither a hearing nor a statement of reasons for the termination in the absence of any demonstration that such was made in bad faith (Matter of Soto v Koehler, 171 AD2d 567, 568, lv denied 78 NY2d 855). We agree with the IAS Court that petitioner failed to meet his burden of proving such bad faith.

We have considered petitioner’s other contentions and find [412]*412them to be without merit. Concur — Carro, J. P., Kupferman, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Martin Schoenfeld, J.), entered March 11, 1992, which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to annul respondents’ determination terminating petitioner as a Correction Officer, denied the application and dismissed the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In settlement of disciplinary charges brought against him, petitioner agreed to be placed on disciplinary probation for a period of one year subject to termination "as any other probationary employee would be”. Thus, eight months later, when respondent Department terminated petitioner based upon new charges arising out of subsequent occurring incidents, petitioner was entitled to neither a hearing nor a statement of reasons for the termination in the absence of any demonstration that such was made in bad faith (Matter of Soto v Koehler, 171 AD2d 567, 568, lv denied 78 NY2d 855). We agree with the IAS Court that petitioner failed to meet his burden of proving such bad faith.

We have considered petitioner’s other contentions and find [412]*412them to be without merit. Concur — Carro, J. P., Kupferman, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

192 A.D.2d 411, 596 N.Y.S.2d 372, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wright-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack