From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

MacDonald v. Town of Huntington

Supreme Court of New York
Nov 17, 2021
2021 N.Y. Slip Op. 6356 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2021)

Opinion

2018-05336 Index 3579/17

11-17-2021

In the Matter of Timothy MacDonald, petitioner, v. Town of Huntington, respondent.

Law Offices of Douglas A. Spencer, PLLC, Miller Place, NY (Regina M. Cafarella of counsel), for petitioner. James P. Clark, Northport, NY, for respondent.


Law Offices of Douglas A. Spencer, PLLC, Miller Place, NY (Regina M. Cafarella of counsel), for petitioner.

James P. Clark, Northport, NY, for respondent.

REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., ROBERT J. MILLER, LARA J. GENOVESI, WILLIAM G. FORD, JJ.

DECISION & JUDGMENT

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Town of Huntington, dated March 17, 2017. The determination adopted the findings of a hearing officer dated March 13, 2017, made after a disciplinary hearing, that the petitioner was guilty of 15 specifications of misconduct, and terminated his employment.

ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, with costs, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits.

The petitioner worked as an ordinance inspector for the respondent, Town of Huntington (hereinafter the Town), for approximately 15 years. In January 2017, a disciplinary charge with 15 specifications was preferred against him alleging that he was guilty of misconduct. A disciplinary hearing was held, at which the petitioner testified. At the conclusion of the hearing, the hearing officer found the petitioner guilty of all 15 specifications and recommended that his employment be terminated. The hearing officer's findings and recommendation were subsequently adopted by the Town, and the petitioner's employment was terminated.

Contrary to the petitioner's contention, the determination that he engaged in misconduct is supported by substantial evidence in the record (see 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176, 180-181; Matter of Gill v Lauro, 84 A.D.3d 958, 959; Silberzweig v Doherty, 76 A.D.3d 915, 916) and the penalty of termination was appropriate (see Matter of Civil Serv. Empls. Assn., Local #1000, AFSCME, AFL-CIO, by Local #854 v Tioga County, 288 A.D.2d 802, 805).

RIVERA, J.P., MILLER, GENOVESI and FORD, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

MacDonald v. Town of Huntington

Supreme Court of New York
Nov 17, 2021
2021 N.Y. Slip Op. 6356 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2021)
Case details for

MacDonald v. Town of Huntington

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Timothy MacDonald, petitioner, v. Town of Huntington…

Court:Supreme Court of New York

Date published: Nov 17, 2021

Citations

2021 N.Y. Slip Op. 6356 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2021)