From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Payton v. Buffalo City School Dist

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 15, 2002
299 A.D.2d 825 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

TP 02-00657

November 15, 2002.

CPLR article 78 proceeding transferred to this Court by an order of Supreme Court, Erie County (O'Donnell, J.), entered February 1, 2002, seeking to annul a determination of respondent after a hearing.

JANET AXELROD, ALBANY (PAUL D. CLAYTON OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER.

MICHAEL B. RISMAN, CORPORATION COUNSEL, BUFFALO (DENISE M. MALICAN OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

PRESENT: PINE, J.P., HURLBUTT, KEHOE, GORSKI, AND LAWTON, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the determination be and the same hereby is unanimously annulled on the law with costs and the petition is granted in part in accordance with the following Memorandum:

Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking to annul respondent's determination, after a hearing conducted by a Hearing Officer, finding petitioner guilty of misconduct and terminating his employment as a teacher's aide. We agree with petitioner that respondent failed to comply with Civil Service Law § 75(2) and thus lacked jurisdiction to discipline him. Section 75(2) provides in pertinent part that a hearing on charges preferred against an employee "shall be held by the officer or body having the power to remove the person against whom such charges are preferred, or by a deputy or other person designated by such officer or body in writing for that purpose." "In the absence of a written delegation authorizing a deputy or other person to conduct the hearing, the removing board or officer has no jurisdiction to discipline an employee" ( Matter of Wiggins v. Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 60 N.Y.2d 385, 387; see Matter of Pieczonka v. Jewett, 273 A.D.2d 842, 843; Matter of Teamster Local Union No. 182 v. Upper Mohawk Val. Regional Water Bd., 259 A.D.2d 1008, 1008). There is no evidence in the record of a written delegation by respondent authorizing the Hearing Officer to conduct petitioner's hearing. We therefore annul the determination and grant the petition in part by reinstating petitioner with back pay and benefits without prejudice to further proceedings by respondent.


Summaries of

Payton v. Buffalo City School Dist

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 15, 2002
299 A.D.2d 825 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Payton v. Buffalo City School Dist

Case Details

Full title:MATTER OF MICHAEL PAYTON, PETITIONER v. BUFFALO CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT…

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

Date published: Nov 15, 2002

Citations

299 A.D.2d 825 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
750 N.Y.S.2d 248

Citing Cases

Stapleton v. Ponte

Civil Service Law § 75, which governs the procedure applicable to the disciplinary proceeding at issue in…

Stafford v. Board of Education

and, 259 AD2d 552, 553), respondent designated him to conduct petitioner's Civil Service Law § 75…