From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Rehill v. New York City Hous. Auth

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 7, 1994
203 A.D.2d 75 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

April 7, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Carmen Beauchamp Ciparick, J.).


Petitioner submits no evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact whether his termination was made in bad faith (see, Matter of York v McGuire, 63 N.Y.2d 760; Matter of Johnson v Katz, 68 N.Y.2d 649). The omissions in the return of which petitioner complains do not satisfy this burden (see, Matter of Cohen v Koehler, 82 N.Y.2d 882, revg 181 A.D.2d 285). Respondents' judgment that petitioner's conduct was unsuitable for a police officer and warranted the penalty of dismissal is "entitled to substantial deference" (Trotta v Ward, 77 N.Y.2d 827, 828) and does not shock one's sense of fairness. It was not error to grant petitioner a name-clearing hearing, the record showing that the circumstances of the termination were stigmatizing and rather widely disseminated. (Cf., Matter of Lentlie v Egan, 61 N.Y.2d 874. )

Concur — Carro, J.P., Wallach, Asch, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.


Summaries of

Matter of Rehill v. New York City Hous. Auth

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 7, 1994
203 A.D.2d 75 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Matter of Rehill v. New York City Hous. Auth

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of JAMES REHILL, Respondent-Appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY…

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

Date published: Apr 7, 1994

Citations

203 A.D.2d 75 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
612 N.Y.S.2d 834

Citing Cases

Shammas v. Kelly

See Haberman v Codd, 48 AD2d 505, 508 (1st Dep't 1975). A mere belief of bad faith, without the presentation…

Beissel v. N.Y.C. Police Dep't

A bad faith determination is defined as one based on "a constitutionally impermissible purpose or in…