From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Feustel v. Rosenblum

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 9, 2007
36 A.D.3d 615 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)

Opinion

No. 2005-08076.

January 9, 2007.

Proceeding pursuant to Public Officers Law § 36 to remove the respondents Scott S. Rosenblum, Robert Lynn Cox III, Hugh A. O'Brien III, Bruce A. Rich, Pia Notaro Carroll, and Mario Posillico from public office in the Incorporated Village of Saltaire.

Before: Santucci, J.P., Krausman, Goldstein and Skelos, JJ.


Adjudged that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

The petitioner failed to establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the respondents engaged in any intentional wrongdoing, self-dealing transactions, or gross dereliction of duties. Thus, none of the respondents' conduct rose to the level of malfeasance, misconduct, maladministration, or malversation as to warrant removal from public office pursuant to Public Officers Law § 36 ( see Matter of Gumo v Canzoneri, 276 AD2d 485; Matter of Deats v Carpenter, 61 AD2d 320; Matter of Pisciotta v Dendievel, 41 AD2d 949).


Summaries of

Feustel v. Rosenblum

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 9, 2007
36 A.D.3d 615 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
Case details for

Feustel v. Rosenblum

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of NOEL FEUSTEL, Petitioner, v. SCOTT S. ROSENBLUM et al.…

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

Date published: Jan 9, 2007

Citations

36 A.D.3d 615 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
808 N.Y.S.2d 297
825 N.Y.S.2d 916

Citing Cases

Patricia Mon. v. William

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the respondents. The petition fails to allege misconduct by the…