Picconi v. Lowery
| Citation | 323 N.Y.S.2d 703,28 N.Y.2d 962,272 N.E.2d 77 |
| Parties | , 272 N.E.2d 77 In the Matter of Lino PICCONI, Respondent, v. Robert O. LOWERY, as Fire Commissioner of the City of New York, Appellant. |
| Decision Date | 26 May 1971 |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals |
J. Lee Rankin, Corp. Counsel (Leonard Koerner and Stanley Buchsbaum, New York City, of counsel), for appellant.
Lester G. Knopping, New York City, for respondent.
Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
JASEN, J., dissents and votes to reverse in the following opinion.
The charges against the petitioner, sustained by the Appellate Division and all the members of this court, constitute a serious breach of the rules and regulations of the fire department. The record discloses that on at least eight occasions the petitioner, as a fire department building inspector, recommended, after inspecting various premises for violations, a certain contractor to perform the required work. This recommendation, of course, did not go unrewarded. One may well imagine the persuasive effect a fire department building inspector's recommendation to hire a particular contractor might have on an owner of a building faced with a possible violation. In addition, the petitioner was found guilty of making deceitful statements concerning his financial situation.
In view of the serious charges, it cannot be said that the measure of punishment--dismissal from the department--was 'shocking to (one's) sense of fairness'. (Matter of McDermott v. Murphy, 15 A.D.2d 479, 222 N.Y.S.2d 111, affd. 12 N.Y.2d 780, 234 N.Y.S.2d 723, 186 N.E.2d 570.) To allow petitioner to remain in the service goes far towards destroying the Fire Commissioner's ability to eliminate corruption and maintain desirable discipline in the department.
I would reverse the Appellate Division and reinstate the Fire Commissioner's determination in all respects.
Order affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pell v. Board of Ed. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale and Mamaroneck, Westchester County
......3; Matter of Procaccino v. Stewart, 25 N.Y.2d 301, 304 N.Y.S.2d 433, 251 N.E.2d 802; but see Matter of Picconi v. Lowery, 35 A.D.2d 693, 314 N.Y.S.2d 606, affd. 28 N.Y.2d 962, 323 N.Y.S.2d 703, 272 N.E.2d 77). Rationality is what is reviewed under both the ......
-
Vincent v. N.Y. State Dep't of Envtl. Conservation, 3792/10
...301, 304 N.Y.S.2d 433, 251 N.E.2d 802; but Page 3 see Matter of Picconi v. Lowery, 35 AD2d 693, 314 N.Y.S.2d 606, affd. 28 NY2d 962, 323 N.Y.S.2d 703, 272 N.E.2d 77). Rationality is what is reviewed under both the substantial evidence rule and the arbitrary and capricious standard. ( Matter......
-
Stonehill v. N.Y. Dep't of Envtl. Conservation, 7606/08.
......3; Matter of Procaccino v. Stewart, 25 N.Y.2d 301, 304 N.Y.S.2d 433, 251 N.E.2d 802; but see Matter of Picconi v. Lowery, 35 A.D.2d 693, 314 N.Y.S.2d 606, affd. 28 N.Y.2d 962, 323 N.Y.S.2d 703, 272 N.E.2d 77). Rationality is what is reviewed under both the ......
-
Merring v. Webber
...(CPLR § 7803, subd. 3 ; Matter of Procaccino v. Stewart, 25 N.Y.2d 301 ; but, see, Matter of Picconi v. Lowery, 35 A D 2d 693, affd. 28 N.Y.2d 962 ). Rationality is what is reviewed under both the substantial evidence rule and the arbitrary and capricious standard. (Matter of 125 Bar Corp. ......
-
"Honor the craft": personal reflections on the judicial legacy of the Honorable Matthew J. Jasen.
...v. Taylor, 250 N.W.2d 570 (Mich. Ct. App. 1977). (33) 239 N.E.2d 345, 347 (N.Y. 1968) (Jasen, J., dissenting). (34) Picconi v. Lowery, 272 N.E.2d 77, 78 (N.Y. 1971) (Jasen, J., dissenting); Short v. Looney, 272 N.E.2d 892, 893 (N.Y. 1971) (Jasen, J., dissenting); Tannenholz v. Waterfront Co......