From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fernandez v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
May 3, 2016
139 A.D.3d 417 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)

Opinion

05-03-2016

In re Carlos FERNANDEZ, Petitioner–Respondent, v. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, Respondent–Appellant.

New York City Transit Authority, Brooklyn (Kavita K. Bhatt of counsel), for appellant-respondent. Martin Druyan and Associates, New York (Martin Druyan of counsel), for petitioner-respondent.


New York City Transit Authority, Brooklyn (Kavita K. Bhatt of counsel), for appellant-respondent.

Martin Druyan and Associates, New York (Martin Druyan of counsel), for petitioner-respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (John A. Barone, J.), entered on or about January 22, 2015, which, on remand, granted petitioner's petition to the extent of restoring him, upon his successful completion of a medical examination, to his position as a bus operator, with full benefits and accrued vacation running from the date of his reinstatement, unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs, and the matter remitted to the original Arbitrator for further proceedings consistent with this decision.

On a prior appeal in this CPLR article 75 proceeding, this Court vacated the arbitration award sustaining respondent New York City Transit Authority's (NYCTA) decision to terminate petitioner's employment, and remanded the matter for imposition of a lesser penalty (Matter of Fernandez v. New York City Tr. Auth., 120 A.D.3d 407, 990 N.Y.S.2d 519 [1st Dept.2014] ). On remand, Supreme Court usurped the Arbitrator's authority when it imposed a lesser penalty, since the matter should have been remitted to the Arbitrator for a rehearing and new determination as to the appropriate lesser penalty (CPLR 7511(d) ; see Matter of Board of Educ. of E. Hampton Union Free School Dist. v. Yusko, 269 A.D.2d 445, 446, 703 N.Y.S.2d 219 [2d Dept.2000] ). The matter should be remitted to the original Arbitrator, because there has been no showing that the original Arbitrator is biased or otherwise incapable of carrying out his duties (see Sawtelle v. Waddell & Reed, Inc., 304 A.D.2d 103, 117, 754 N.Y.S.2d 264 [1st Dept.2003] ).

We have considered NYCTA's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.

MAZZARELLI, J.P., FRIEDMAN, ANDRIAS, MOSKOWITZ, KAHN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Fernandez v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
May 3, 2016
139 A.D.3d 417 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)
Case details for

Fernandez v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth.

Case Details

Full title:In re Carlos FERNANDEZ, Petitioner–Respondent, v. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: May 3, 2016

Citations

139 A.D.3d 417 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)
2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 3435
29 N.Y.S.3d 175

Citing Cases

TCR Sports Broad. Holding, LLP v. WN Partner, LLC

SSA Holdings LLC v. Kaplan, 120 A.D.3d 1111, 1111-12 (1 st Dep't 2014) (where the stay was pending the…