The following was originally posted at Public Personnel Blog of Harvey Randall, Esq.
Disqualifying an applicant for appointment by a civil service commission
Matter of Murray v County of Nassau Civil Service Commission, 2007 NY Slip Op 50927(U), Supreme Court, Nassau County, James P. McCormack, J.
The Nassau Civil Service Commission disqualified Sandor Murray for employment as a Nassau County Police Officer. The Commission based its determination of Murray’s alleged failure to meet the “psychological requirement of the position.”
Murray, claiming that the Commission “acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner” when it disqualified him for appointment as a police office, filed an Article 78 petition seeking a court order directing his appointment as a Nassau County Police Officer.
Judge McCormack dismissed Murray’s petition, holding that the Commission’s decision was not irrational. Indeed, said the court, its determination is “supported by substantial evidence.” In addition, Judge McCormack found that the Commission had complied with New York Civil Service Law Section 50(4) when it considered whether Murray should be disqualified for appointment as a police officer. *
According to the decision, the standard for judicial review of an administrative determination pursuant to CPLR Article 78 is limited to an inquiry into whether the agency acted arbitrarily and, or, capriciously.
Noting that a civil service commission has wide discretion in determining the fitness of candidates, Judge McCormack, citing Verne v. Suffolk County Department of Civil Service, 5 AD2d 498 and Needleman v. County of Rockland, 270 AD2d 4, said that the exercise of such discretion “is particularly broad in the hiring of persons for position in law enforcement, to whom high standards must be applied.”
The decision points out that although Murray’s medical expert’s opinion differed from that of the Commission’s medical expert, “[i]t is not for the courts to choose between diverse professional opinions.”
Thus, said the court, “where there is any rational basis or credible evidence in support of an agency’s determination,” the administrative decision will be upheld (see Matter of Curcio v. Nassau County Civil Service Commission, 220 AD2d 412).
____________
* Section 54.4, in pertinent part, provides: No person shall be disqualified pursuant tothis subdivision unless he [or she] has been given a written statement of the reasonstherefor and afforded an opportunity to make an explanation and to submit facts in opposition to such disqualification.
Source: Initially published on the Internet in New York Public Personnel Law. Reproduced with permission. Copyright© 2006, 2007, 2008, Public Employment Law Press.
