From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Poidomani v. Nassau Bd. of Coop. Educ. Servs.

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Apr 15, 2015
127 A.D.3d 978 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)

Opinion

2013-06209, Index No. 881/13.

04-15-2015

In the Matter of Santo POIDOMANI, petitioner, v. NASSAU BOARD OF COOPERATIVE EDUCATIONAL SERVICES, respondent.

Louis D. Stober, Jr., LLC, Garden City, N.Y., for petitioner. Ingerman Smith, LLP, Hauppauge, N.Y. (Michael G. McAlvin of counsel), for respondent.


Louis D. Stober, Jr., LLC, Garden City, N.Y., for petitioner.

Ingerman Smith, LLP, Hauppauge, N.Y. (Michael G. McAlvin of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Nassau Board of Cooperative Educational Services dated September 27, 2012, which adopted the findings of a hearing officer dated August 24, 2012, made after a hearing, that the petitioner was guilty of charges of misconduct and insubordination, and terminated his employment.

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

Pursuant to CPLR article 78, judicial review of an administrative determination made after a hearing required by law at which evidence is taken is limited to consideration of whether that determination is supported by substantial evidence (see CPLR 7803[4] ; 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v. State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176, 408 N.Y.S.2d 54, 379 N.E.2d 1183 ; Matter of Sica v. Walker, 115 A.D.3d 869, 982 N.Y.S.2d 339 ; Matter of Smith v. Carter, 61 A.D.3d 982, 876 N.Y.S.2d 903 ). Substantial evidence has been defined as “such relevant proof as a reasonable mind may accept as adequate to support a conclusion or ultimate fact” (300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v. State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d at 180, 408 N.Y.S.2d 54, 379 N.E.2d 1183 ).

Here, the determination under review was supported by substantial evidence. Furthermore, the imposed penalty of dismissal was not so disproportionate to the offense committed as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness (see Matter of Pell v. Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 N.Y.2d 222, 234, 356 N.Y.S.2d 833, 313 N.E.2d 321 ).

SKELOS, J.P., LEVENTHAL, COHEN and DUFFY, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Poidomani v. Nassau Bd. of Coop. Educ. Servs.

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Apr 15, 2015
127 A.D.3d 978 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)
Case details for

Poidomani v. Nassau Bd. of Coop. Educ. Servs.

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of Santo Poidomani, petitioner, v. Nassau Board of…

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

Date published: Apr 15, 2015

Citations

127 A.D.3d 978 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)
4 N.Y.S.3d 910
2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 3167

Citing Cases

Weinstein v. N.Y. State Workers' Comp. Bd.

While the excessiveness of a penalty is not one of the enumerated bases upon which an arbitration award may…

Henry v. N.Y. State Workers' Comp. Bd.

Accordingly, the excessiveness of a penalty is a basis upon which the arbitration award may be vacated (see…