Opinion
October 13, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Tompkins, J.).
The IAS Court did not abuse its discretion in granting injunctive relief enforcing Port Authority regulation PAI 15-5.01, section III, banning the solicitation by Port Authority employees of Port Authority patrons or tenants or others who do business with the Port Authority. The regulation clearly serves the Port Authority's interest in preventing the appearance of coercive conduct and overreaching by its employees.
New York courts have repeatedly upheld bans by police departments on solicitation by police officers and their agents as reasonable measures to protect police integrity (McGuire v Krane, 48 N.Y.2d 661; Matter of Petri v Milhim, 136 A.D.2d 641, appeal dismissed 71 N.Y.2d 965; cf., Baron v Meloni, 556 F. Supp. 796, 800, affd 779 F.2d 36, cert denied 474 U.S. 1058). This is in accord with Federal authority recognizing the right of governmental employers to regulate the speech of their employees with respect to matters bearing on their employment that are not of "public concern" (Connick v Myers, 461 U.S. 138, 147-148; Pickering v Board of Educ., 391 U.S. 563, 568).
We have reviewed defendants' remaining arguments and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Carro, Milonas and Kupferman, JJ.