From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Caruso v. Ward

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 2, 1989
155 A.D.2d 242 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Opinion

November 2, 1989

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County, Charles Ramos, J., Louis Grossman, J.


Petitioners have not shown a clear legal right to the relief sought, or that respondents acted unreasonably. They have not presented evidentiary facts that raise the issue of bad faith, illegality or arbitrary action. (D'Aiuto v Department of Water Resources, 51 A.D.2d 700, 701.) The decision to enlarge the probation period was rationally related to the goal of more thorough evaluation of new officers' fitness for duty. Respondents reasonably relied on a report by the Mayor's Advisory Committee on Police Management and Personnel Policy. The Committee concluded that a longer probation period, combined with other means of evaluating job performance, would serve to prevent recurrence of widely publicized police-civilian incidents, many with racial overtones.

Concur — Kupferman, J.P., Carro, Asch, Rosenberger and Smith, JJ.


Summaries of

Matter of Caruso v. Ward

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 2, 1989
155 A.D.2d 242 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
Case details for

Matter of Caruso v. Ward

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of PHIL CARUSO, as President of the Patrolmen's Benevolent…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Nov 2, 1989

Citations

155 A.D.2d 242 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
546 N.Y.S.2d 853

Citing Cases

In re Nespoli

The affidavit of respondent Commissioner of the Department of Sanitation of the City of New York (the…