Lane v. City of New York

• Decision Date: 14 February 2012
• Citation: 938 N.Y.S.2d 597,92 A.D.3d 786,2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 01257
• Parties: In the Matter of Martin LANE, appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., respondents.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 01257
92 A.D.3d 786
938 N.Y.S.2d 597

In the Matter of Martin LANE, appellant,
v.
CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., respondents.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Feb. 14, 2012.

[938 N.Y.S.2d 598]

Wolin & Wolin, Jericho, N.Y. (Alan E. Wolin of counsel), for appellant.

Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Scott Shorr of counsel; Azziza J. Bensaid on the brief), for respondents.

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, A.P.J., DANIEL D. ANGIOLILLO, RANDALL T. ENG, and JEFFREY A. COHEN, JJ.

[92 A.D.3d 786] In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York City Department of Correction dated May 18, 2010, which terminated the petitioner's probationary employment as a corrections officer, the petitioner appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Butler, J.), dated November 18, 2010, which, inter alia, granted the motion of the City of New York, Dora B. Schriro, and the New York City Department of Correction pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) to dismiss the petition, and, in effect, dismissed the proceeding.

ORDERED that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The petitioner was hired as a probationary corrections officer in August 2008. Between November 2008 and September 2009, he had submitted four Use of Force reports and accepted a Command Discipline in connection with three violations of departmental rules stemming from his failure to report for an overtime shift. On May 18, 2010, his probationary employment was terminated.

The employment of a probationary employee may be terminated without a hearing and without a statement of reasons in the absence of a demonstration that the termination was in bad faith, for a constitutionally impermissible or an illegal purpose, or in violation of statutory or decisional law ( see Matter of Swinton v. Safir, 93 N.Y.2d 758, 762–763, 697 N.Y.S.2d 869, 720 N.E.2d 89; Matter of Johnson v. Katz, 68 N.Y.2d 649, 650, 505 N.Y.S.2d 64, 496 N.E.2d 223; Matter of York v. McGuire, 63 N.Y.2d 760, 761, 480 N.Y.S.2d 320, 469 N.E.2d 838; Matter of Johnson v. New York City Dept. of Educ., 73 A.D.3d 927, 900 N.Y.S.2d 737;

[938 N.Y.S.2d 599]

Walsh v. New York State Thruway Auth., 24 A.D.3d 755, 808 N.Y.S.2d 710; Matter of Wilson v. Bratton, 266 A.D.2d 140, 141, 699 N.Y.S.2d 29). Judicial review of the discharge of a probationary employee is limited to whether the determination was made in bad faith or for the other...