Moquin v. Lowery
| Decision Date | 29 September 1970 |
| Citation | 35 A.D.2d 661,314 N.Y.S.2d 474 |
| Parties | Albert J. MOQUIN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Robert O. LOWERY, as Fire Commissioner of the City of New York, John V. Lindsay, as Mayor of the City of New York, and Mario A. Procaccino, as Comptroller of the City of New York, and The City of New York, Respondents-Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
M. Gordon, New York City, for petitioner-appellant.
B. Gross, New York City, for respondents-respondents.
Before STEVENS, P.J., and EAGER, McGIVERN, and NUNEZ, JJ.
The determination of the Fire Commissioner dismissing petitioner-appellant from his position as supervising electrical inspector of the Fire Department of the City of New York is unanimously modified on the law to provide for the payment of back pay to the petitioner-appellant for a period of one year and, as thus modified, the determination is confirmed, without costs and without disbursements.
Respondents in their brief agree that
Petitioner was suspended without pay for a period of 14 months before the final determination dismissing him was made. While he waived the limitation of the 30-day period of suspension provided by § 75 of the Civil Service Law by asking for an adjournment, he thereafter repeatedly pressed for a hearing to no avail for many months. Under those circumstances, petitioner was entitled to back pay for the period of delay, limited to one year's salary. In all other respects, we find that the record presents substantial evidence to support the findings of the Fire Commissioner, and that dismissal was an appropriate disciplinary action.
Settle order on notice.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sinicropi v. Bennett
...of Stein v. Murphy, 44 A.D.2d 796, 355 N.Y.S.2d 133; Matter of Mason v. Perrotta, 41 A.D.2d 916, 343 N.Y.S.2d 748; Moquin v. Lowery, 35 A.D.2d 661, 314 N.Y.S.2d 474; Matter of Amkraut v. Hults, 21 A.D.2d 260, 250 N.Y.S.2d 171, affd. 15 N.Y.2d 627, 255 N.Y.S.2d 672, 203 N.E.2d 923, is suspen......
-
Scornavacca v. Leary
...N.Y.S.2d 171 (1st Dept., 1964), affirmed, 15 N.Y.2d 627, 255 N.Y.S.2d 672, 203 N.E.2d 923 (1964)). Indeed, in Moquin v. Lowery, 35 A.D.2d 661, 314 N.Y.S.2d 474 (1st Dept., 1970), the period of suspension of a supervising electrical inspector of the New York City Fire Department was fourteen......
-
Stein v. Murphy
...pay. Reliance is also placed on decisions of this Court (Matter of Amkraut v. Hults, 21 A.D.2d 260, 250 N.Y.S.2d 171; Moquin v. Lowery, 35 A.D.2d 661, 314 N.Y.S.2d 474). Neither of these cases involved policemen and both were governed by different statutes. As pointed out in Brenner, supra ......
-
Mason v. Perrotta
...(Matter of Amkraut v. Hults, 21 A.D.2d 260, 250 N.Y.S.2d 171, affd. 15 N.Y.2d 627, 255 N.Y.S.2d 672, 203 N.E.2d 923; Moquin v. Lowery, 35 A.D.2d 661, 314 N.Y.S.2d 474). ...