Arsenault v. Forquer
| Decision Date | 12 October 1993 |
| Citation | 197 A.D.2d 554,602 N.Y.S.2d 653 |
| Parties | Christopher ARSENAULT, Respondent, v. Betty FORQUER, etc., et al., Appellants, et al., Defendant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Mulholland, Minion & Roe, Williston Park (John F. Mulholland and Vincent D. McNamara, of counsel), for appellants.
Raymond S. Voulo, Mineola (Thecia Voulo, of counsel), for respondent.
Before BRACKEN, J.P., and BALLETTA, EIBER and COPERTINO, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In an action to recover damages for libel and for wrongful discharge from employment, the defendant Betty Forquer, individually, and as Chair of the Port Washington Water District, appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O'Shaughnessy, J.), dated April 2, 1991, as denied her cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint in its entirety.
ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the cross motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.
On July 5, 1988, the plaintiff entered into an employment agreement with the defendant Port Washington Water District (hereinafter PWWD) as a water service trainee. The plaintiff's employment was governed by the rules of the Nassau County Civil Service Commission (hereinafter the Commission), providing that PWWD trainees undergo a 26-week probationary period during which, upon proper notice, they could be discharged for unsatisfactory conduct or performance, and by the terms and conditions of a collective bargaining agreement, providing for a six-month probationary period during which employees could be disciplined or discharged without recourse. At a special meeting on January 3, 1989, the PWWD discharged the plaintiff, effective January 11, 1989, and he was so informed by letter signed by the appellant. Service of the dismissal letter on the plaintiff on January 3, 1989, complied with the one-week notice requirement set forth in Rule XVII of the Commission. Moreover, on December 22, 1988, approximately two weeks before the end of the plaintiff's probationary period, the necessary forms, a probationary report (CS-14), and a report of personnel action (CS-39M), were prepared and filed with the Commission, as required by the Commission's rules.
On August 23, 1989, the plaintiff commenced the instant action against the PWWD and against its Chair, the appellant herein, alleging two causes of action. In December 1990 the appellant cross-moved for summary judgment on the first cause of action to recover damages for wrongful discharge from employment, on the ground that the plaintiff was "discharged legally and within the parameters of the civil service laws of the State of New York". The court held that by merely alleging that the plaintiff had been discharged by proper procedures, the appellant had failed to eliminate all material issues of fact and was thus not entitled to summary judgment. We disagree.
Under the applicable civil service rules and the terms and conditions of the collective bargaining agreement between the parties, both of which governed the plaintiff's probationary term of employment, the plaintiff was lawfully discharged from his probationary position and has no recourse therefor. Since the PWWD complied...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lore v. City of Syracuse
...453, 455, 523 N.Y.S.2d 95 (N.Y.App. Div. 1st Dep't 1988)); Dillon, 261 A.D.2d at 38, 704 N.Y.S.2d 1; Arsenault v. Forquer, 197 A.D.2d 554, 556, 602 N.Y.S.2d 653 (N.Y.App. Div.2d Dep't 1993). An exhaustive review of plaintiffs second amended complaint reveals plaintiff fails to plead with th......
-
Thorsen ex rel. Sons of Norway, Inc. v. Sons Norway
...Fuji Photo Film U.S.A., Inc. v. McNulty, 669 F.Supp.2d 405, 411 (S.D.N.Y.2009) (citations omitted); see also Arsenault v. Forquer, 197 A.D.2d 554, 602 N.Y.S.2d 653 (2d Dep't 1993) (“[T]he specifics of all three component parts of the publication, i.e., its time, manner, and audience, must b......
-
El Jamal v. Weil
...261 A.D.2d 34, 38, 704 N.Y.S.2d 1;Sterling Doubleday Enters. v. Marro, 238 A.D.2d 502, 503–504, 656 N.Y.S.2d 676;Arsenault v. Forquer, 197 A.D.2d 554, 556, 602 N.Y.S.2d 653). Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have granted that branch of the defendant's motion which was pursuant to CPLR ......
-
Silvercorp Metals Inc. v. Anthion Mgmt. LLC
...allege the time, place and manner of the false statement and to specify to whom it was made ( Dillon citing Arsenault v. Forquer, 197 A.D.2d 554, 602 N.Y.S.2d 653 [2d Dept 1993]; Vardi v. Mutual Life Insurance Co. of New York, 136 A.D.2d 453, 523 N.Y.S.2d 95). “Distinguishing between assert......