Zacchi v. Savitt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Zacchi v. Savitt

46 A.D.2d 788, 361 N.Y.S.2d 30, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3660

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

DecidedNovember 12, 1974

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 46 A.D.2d 788 (Zacchi v. Savitt) 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

Zacchi v. Savitt, 46 A.D.2d 788, 361 N.Y.S.2d 30, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3660 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

a proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the CPLR to annul a determination, made ¡after a hearing, that petitioner, an employee of the appellant school district, had participated in a strike and docking him therefor, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered August 6, 1973, which granted the application and directed that petitioner be reimbursed for moneys withheld from his salary. Judgment affirmed, with costs. The issue in this proceeding was whether the determination under review was supported by substantial evidence. Since this issue is specified in Question (4 of CPLR 7803, 'Special Term should not have decided it, but instead should have transferred the proceeding directly to this court (CPLR 7804, subd. '[g]). However, we have reviewed the record of the hearing and conclude that the presumption arising under section 210 (subd. 2, par. [b]) of the Civil Service Law that petitioner was absent from work on the days in question without permission was amply refuted by him. There was absolutely no evidence offered to the contrary. Hence the determination under review was arbitrary and capricious and was properly annulled. Martuscello, Acting P. J., Shapiro, Christ, Benjamin and Munder, JJ., concur.

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

a proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the CPLR to annul a determination, made ¡after a hearing, that petitioner, an employee of the appellant school district, had participated in a strike and docking him therefor, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered August 6, 1973, which granted the application and directed that petitioner be reimbursed for moneys withheld from his salary. Judgment affirmed, with costs. The issue in this proceeding was whether the determination under review was supported by substantial evidence. Since this issue is specified in Question (4 of CPLR 7803, 'Special Term should not have decided it, but instead should have transferred the proceeding directly to this court (CPLR 7804, subd. '[g]). However, we have reviewed the record of the hearing and conclude that the presumption arising under section 210 (subd. 2, par. [b]) of the Civil Service Law that petitioner was absent from work on the days in question without permission was amply refuted by him. There was absolutely no evidence offered to the contrary. Hence the determination under review was arbitrary and capricious and was properly annulled. Martuscello, Acting P. J., Shapiro, Christ, Benjamin and Munder, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

46 A.D.2d 788, 361 N.Y.S.2d 30, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3660, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zacchi-v-savitt-nyappdiv-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack