Opinion
October 19, 1987
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies requires that one first exhaust all available administrative channels before looking to the courts for relief (see, McKart v. United States, 395 U.S. 185; Watergate II Apts. v. Buffalo Sewer Auth., 46 N.Y.2d 52; Steinberg v. Sea Gate Assn., 118 A.D.2d 558). While it is true that the exhaustion rule is not an inflexible one (see, Watergate II Apts. v. Buffalo Sewer Auth., supra), in the instant case, the petitioner has not established that the disciplinary procedures invoked were beyond the Transit Authority's grant of power or that resort to an administrative remedy would be futile or that its pursuit would cause irreparable injury. Accordingly, we conclude that the petitioner must first complete the disciplinary hearing before he can challenge the procedures in court. Kunzeman, J.P., Kooper, Spatt and Sullivan, JJ., concur.