A police officer must first file an appeal with the NYC Civil Service Commission before filing an Article 78 under the doctrine of “exhaustion of remedies.”
A hiring agency may disqualify a candidate up to three years after hiring the candidate. The three year limit does not apply if fraud was used in the application
Police Officer Candidate’s Disqualification based upon Hearing Impairment Annulled
Continue Reading Police Officer Candidate’s Disqualification based upon Hearing Impairment Annulled
Matter of the Ridge Road Fire District v Michael P. Schiano, as Hearing Officer
In this Article 78 case, Kevin Nowak applied for benefits after experiencing back pain while operating a vehicle in response to a fire alarm in November 2002. Following this incident, Nowak applied for disability benefits and was denied. He then had
Matter of Paul Mazzotte v Thomas DiNapoli, as State Comptroller
Petitioner was a correction officer for over 20 years. In 2001, he applied for performance of duty disability retirement benefits alleging he was permanently disabled by coronary artery disease (CAD) after having coronary artery bypass surgery. According to petitioner, the disease was caused by the
In the Matter of Department of Correction v Stanley Saint-Phard…
In this disciplinary proceeding, pursuant to Article 75 of the Civil Service Law, Respondent, a Correction Officer, allegedly used impermissible force against an inmate by dispersing a chemical agent in the inmate’s face and also placed the inmate in a chokehold.
On October 16, 2008,
Petitioner retired while 3020a disciplinary charges were pending against him. The Appe
llate Division Second Department held that the teacher was presumed to have known the Chancellor’s rule that you cannot have your license reinstated if you resign with 3020a charges pending.
Read about this Article 78 3020a case here.
After charges were filed and a hearing held before a hearing officer Petitioner filed an Article 78 suit claiming his privilege against self incrimination had been violated.
The Appellate Division, Second Department wrote: “The privilege against self-incrimination was not a bar to the disciplinary charges because the petitioner was not required to waive his immunity
Plaintiff claimed improper termination from respondent County and alleged protection under civil service law section 75 – be the public sector whistleblower law.
Plaintiff failed to file a notice of claim as required by County law section 52 and defendants motion to dismiss this improper termination case was granted. New York State general municipal
The question presented in this Article 78 appeal:
Would a teacher be able to apply time served on very different license to calculate whether they are beyond probationary status?
In this article 78 case of which sought to annul petitioners probationary termination petitioner claimed the service under a different license would win added to