Little v. New York City Transit Authority

Decision Date07 April 1971
Citation28 N.Y.2d 719,321 N.Y.S.2d 111
Parties, 269 N.E.2d 821 Maxcie D. LITTLE, Appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, Respondent.
CourtNew York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, 34 A.D.2d 998, 312 N.Y.S.2d 574.

Eli Ratner, New York City (Stanley Stein, New York City, of counsel), for appellant.

Albert B. Lewis, New York City, and Leon R. Port, Brooklyn, for respondent.

Railroad clerk for the New York City Transit Authority brought a proceeding to annul determination dismissing him from his position. The Appellate Division confirmed the determination while holding that the clerk's discharge, after he was shown to have collected, on three occasions during a period of several weeks, three 20cents cash fares without tendering the subway tokens was not excessive punishment. The clerk, who was 65 years old and who had 26 years service, appealed.

In the Court of Appeals it was argued that dismissal was an extreme and excessive punishment and an abuse of discretion.

Order affirmed, with costs.

All concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Pell v. Board of Ed. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale and Mamaroneck, Westchester County
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • May 15, 1974
    ...of its judicial inquiry as to the abuse of discretion, had complete power over the subject. (But see Little v. New York City Tr. Auth., 28 N.Y.2d 719, 321 N.Y.S.2d 111, 269 N.E.2d 821, where on a similar factual pattern, a totally different result was A reduction of the penalty here, the de......
  • Tannenholz v. Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • March 23, 1972
    ...not follow that his long service without any prior incident should excuse this flagrant offense. (Cf. Little v. New York City Tr. Auth., 28 N.Y.2d 719, 321 N.Y.S.2d 111, 269 N.E.2d 821, affg. 34 A.D.2d 998, 312 N.Y.S.2d 574; Matter of Mansfield v. Murphy, 16 N.Y.2d 986, 265 N.Y.S.2d 297, 21......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT