From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hernandez v. City of White Plains

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 13, 2003
301 A.D.2d 523 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2001-06539

Argued December 13, 2002.

January 13, 2003.

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the appellants, the City of White Plains and Michael A. Gismondi, the Commissioner of Building of the City of White Plains, dated November 17, 2000, which terminated the petitioner's probationary employment as a Housing Code Enforcement Officer, the appeal, by permission, is from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Leavitt, J.), entered June 14, 2001, as directed that a fact-finding hearing be held.

Edward P. Dunphy, Corporation Counsel, White Plains, N.Y. (Daniel K. Spencer and Doreen Lusita of counsel), for appellants.

James M. Rose, White Plains, N.Y., for respondent.

Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., HOWARD MILLER, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed.

It is well settled that a court's review of a determination to terminate a probationary employee is limited to consideration of whether the dismissal was in bad faith, in violation of statutory or decisional law, or for unconstitutional or illegal reasons. Unless one or more of these conditions is present, a probationary employee may be terminated without a hearing or a statement of reasons (see Matter of Johnson v. Katz, 68 N.Y.2d 649, 650; Matter of York v. McGuire, 63 N.Y.2d 760, 761; Matter of Williams v. Commissioner of the Off. of Mental Health of State of N.Y., 259 A.D.2d 623; Matter of Green v. Board of Educ. of City Dist. of N.Y., 262 A.D.2d 411). While a hearing may be required to resolve issues of fact regarding whether the reasons for the termination were impermissible, the petitioner bears the burden of presenting competent proof of the alleged bad faith, the violation of statutory or decisional law, or the unconstitutional or illegal reasons (see Matter of Williams v. Commissioner of Off. of Mental Health of State of N.Y., supra; Matter of Green v. Board of Educ. of City Dist. of N.Y., supra; Matter of Beacham v. Brown, 215 A.D.2d 334). Here, the Supreme Court erroneously ordered a fact-finding hearing since the petitioner failed to sustain that burden.

SANTUCCI, J.P., H. MILLER, SCHMIDT and TOWNES, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Hernandez v. City of White Plains

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 13, 2003
301 A.D.2d 523 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Hernandez v. City of White Plains

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF JOSE HERNANDEZ, respondent, v. CITY OF WHITE PLAINS, ET…

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

Date published: Jan 13, 2003

Citations

301 A.D.2d 523 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
753 N.Y.S.2d 731

Citing Cases

Smith v. Kingsboro

Two months after the petitioner began his employment, and within his probationary period, KPC discovered the…

McDonnell v. Lancaster

The burden is on the petitioner in the first instance to present evidence of a statutory violation, which in…