Opinion
January 23, 1995
Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed, on the merits, with costs.
The petitioner, a sanitation worker employed by the Village of Port Chester, was absent from work on 22 days between August 26, 1991, and February 8, 1993. After a hearing, the Hearing Officer found that the absences were unauthorized and he recommended termination of the petitioner's employment. By resolution dated May 24, 1993, the Board of Trustees of the Village of Port Chester (hereinafter the Board), confirmed the Hearing Officer's findings and accepted his recommendation that the petitioner's employment be terminated. On June 21, 1993, a post-termination hearing was held before the Board. After the post-termination hearing, the Board adhered to its prior resolution and found that the termination of the petitioner's employment was proper under the circumstances.
The determination of the Board that the petitioner's absences were unauthorized and terminating his employment, was supported by substantial evidence (see, People ex rel. Vega v. Smith, 66 N.Y.2d 130; Matter of Purdy v. Kreisberg, 47 N.Y.2d 354, 358; 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v. State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176, 179; Matter of Foust v. Village of Port Chester, 211 A.D.2d 717 [decided herewith]; Matter of Telesco v. Village of Port Chester, 211 A.D.2d 723 [decided herewith]).
The petitioner's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit (see, Matter of Hughes v Suffolk County Dept. of Civ. Serv., 74 N.Y.2d 833, 834; Matter of NAB Constr. Corp. v. Goldin, 175 A.D.2d 245; Matter of Hennekens v State Tax Commn., 114 A.D.2d 599). Rosenblatt, J.P., Altman, Friedmann and Florio, JJ., concur.