Beacham v. Brown
| Decision Date | 30 May 1995 |
| Parties | In re Application of Cynthia BEACHAM, Petitioner-Respondent, For a Judgment, etc., v. Lee P. BROWN, etc., et al., Respondents-Appellants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
R.E. Kerno, for petitioner-respondent.
J.L. Gordon, for respondents-appellants.
Before SULLIVAN, J.P., and ROSENBERGER, ROSS, ASCH and WILLIAMS, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court New York County (Stuart Cohen, J.), entered November 21, 1991, which set this matter down for a trial pursuant CPLR 7804(h) to resolve factual issues, unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, the order and judgment (one paper) of the same Court (Nelson H. Cosgrove, J.), entered March 23, 1994, which granted petitioner's petition pursuant to CPLR Article 78 and directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioner to her former position as an officer in the New York City Police Department effective as of the date of her termination, February 22, 1991, is reversed accordingly and the respondent's determination, which terminated the petitioner from her position as a probationary police officer is hereby reinstated, without costs.
"It is well settled that a probationary employee may be discharged without a hearing and without a statement of reasons in the absence of any demonstration that dismissal was for a constitutionally impermissible purpose or in violation of statutory or decisional law" (Matter of York v. McGuire, 63 N.Y.2d 760, 761, 480 N.Y.S.2d 320, 469 N.E.2d 838). Judicial review of a determination to discharge a probationary employee is therefore limited to an inquiry as to whether the termination was made in bad faith (Matter of Johnson v. Katz, 68 N.Y.2d 649, 650, 505 N.Y.S.2d 64, 496 N.E.2d 223). While a hearing may be required where an issue of substantial nature is raised that the termination was not due to the failure to perform satisfactory service during the probationary period and was due to causes unrelated to work performance (see, Miciotta v. McMickens, 118 A.D.2d 489, 491, 499 N.Y.S.2d 960), the petitioner bears the burden of presenting competent proof that the dismissal was for an improper reason or in bad faith (see, Matter of Anonymous v. Codd, 40 N.Y.2d 860, 387 N.Y.S.2d 1004, 356 N.E.2d 475).
Our review of the record, as it was presented to the court which set the matter down for a hearing pursuant to CPLR 7804(h), demonstrates that the petitioner failed to present evidence...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gordon v. Town of Queensbury
...1004, 356 N.E.2d 475; Matter of Weir v. State of New York Thruway Auth., 231 A.D.2d 836, 837, 647 N.Y.S.2d 870; Matter of Beacham v. Brown, 215 A.D.2d 334, 627 N.Y.S.2d 358, lv. denied 87 N.Y.2d 801, 637 N.Y.S.2d 688, 661 N.E.2d 160). To that end, although a hearing may be required where th......
-
Ryan v. Shea
... ... where an issue of a substantial nature is raised regarding ... the probationary employee's dismissal (Matter of ... Beacham v Brown, 215 A.D.2d 334 [1st Dept ... 1995], Iv denied 87 N.Y.2d 801 [1995]; Matter of ... Miciotta v McMickens, 118 A.D.2d 489, 491 ... ...
-
Garcia v. Bratton
...of the findings of the Internal Affairs Bureau, she was not entitled, as a probationary officer, to a hearing. (Matter of Beacham v. Brown, 215 A.D.2d 334, 627 N.Y.S.2d 358, lv. denied 87 N.Y.2d 801, 637 N.Y.S.2d 688, 661 N.E.2d Accordingly, the order of the Supreme Court, New York County (......
-
Wilson v. Bratton
...from petitioner's unemployment insurance hearing, which is not admissible in court proceedings (Labor Law § 537; Beacham v. Brown, 215 A.D.2d 334, 335, 627 N.Y.S.2d 358, lv. denied 87 N.Y.2d 801, 637 N.Y.S.2d 688, 661 N.E.2d The result was based on a clear misreading of the record, which sh......