From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Application of Mahadio v. Kerik

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 29, 2002
298 A.D.2d 305 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

2028

October 29, 2002.

Determination of respondent Police Commissioner, dated March 9, 2001, imposing upon petitioner a forfeiture of 25 vacation days, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Jane Solomon, J.], entered October 9, 2001), dismissed, without costs.

HOWARD B. STERINBACH, for petitioner.

LINDA H. YOUNG, for respondents.

Before: Tom, J.P., Saxe, Sullivan, Rosenberger, Lerner, JJ.


Substantial evidence (see 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v. State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176, 181-182) supports respondent's findings that petitioner, while off-duty, wrongfully and without just cause displayed his weapon while making a threatening remark to a civilian employee of the store, and that he addressed persons in the store in an ethnically offensive manner. No basis exists to disturb respondent's findings of credibility (see Matter of Berenhaus v. Ward, 70 N.Y.2d 436, 443-444). The penalty imposed does not shock our sense of fairness (see Matter of Kelly v. Safir, 96 N.Y.2d 32, 38).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

In re Application of Mahadio v. Kerik

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 29, 2002
298 A.D.2d 305 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

In re Application of Mahadio v. Kerik

Case Details

Full title:IN RE APPLICATION OF POLICE OFFICER ALEXANDER MAHADIO, ETC., PETITIONER…

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

Date published: Oct 29, 2002

Citations

298 A.D.2d 305 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
748 N.Y.S.2d 494