MATTER OF HERNANDEZ v. City of White Plains

Decision Date13 January 2003
Citation301 A.D.2d 523,753 N.Y.S.2d 731
PartiesIn the Matter of JOSE HERNANDEZ, Respondent,<BR>v.<BR>CITY OF WHITE PLAINS et al., Appellants.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Santucci, J.P., H. Miller, Schmidt and Townes, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed.

It is well settled that a court's review of a determination to terminate a probationary employee is limited to consideration of whether the dismissal was in bad faith, in violation of statutory or decisional law, or for unconstitutional or illegal reasons. Unless one or more of these conditions is present, a probationary employee may be terminated without a hearing or a statement of reasons (see Matter of Johnson v Katz, 68 NY2d 649, 650; Matter of York v McGuire, 63 NY2d 760, 761; Matter of Williams v Commissioner of Off. of Mental Health of State of N.Y., 259 AD2d 623; Matter of Green v Board of Educ. of City Dist. of N.Y., 262 AD2d 411). While a hearing may be required to resolve issues of fact regarding whether the reasons for the termination were impermissible, the petitioner bears the burden of presenting competent proof of the alleged bad faith, the violation of statutory or decisional law, or the unconstitutional or illegal reasons (see Matter of Williams v Commissioner of Off. of Mental Health of State of N.Y., supra; Matter of Green v Board of Educ. of City Dist. of N.Y., supra; Matter of Beacham v Brown, 215 AD2d 334). Here, the Supreme Court erroneously ordered a fact-finding hearing since the petitioner failed to sustain that burden.

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Lake v. Town of Southold
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • December 30, 2020
    ...63 N.E.3d 1152 ; Matter of Anonymous v. Codd, 40 N.Y.2d 860, 861, 387 N.Y.S.2d 1004, 356 N.E.2d 475 ; Matter of Hernandez v. City of White Plains, 301 A.D.2d 523, 524, 753 N.Y.S.2d 731 ). Where, however, the record presents triable issues of fact as to whether the employer was acting in goo......

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