Opinion
No. 69 SSM 11
06-25-2020
In the Matter of Richard ARROYO, Respondent, v. James P. O'NEILL, as Police Commissioner of the City of New York, et al., Appellants.
James E. Johnson, Corporation Counsel, New York City (Lorenzo Di Silvio, Richard Dearing and Ingrid R. Gustafson of counsel), for appellants. Worth, Longworth & London, LLP, New York City (Howard B. Sterinbach of counsel), for respondent.
James E. Johnson, Corporation Counsel, New York City (Lorenzo Di Silvio, Richard Dearing and Ingrid R. Gustafson of counsel), for appellants.
Worth, Longworth & London, LLP, New York City (Howard B. Sterinbach of counsel), for respondent.
OPINION OF THE COURT On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules, order reversed, with costs, petition dismissed in its entirety, and certified question answered in the negative. Under the circumstances of this case, the penalty imposed does not shock one's sense of fairness (see Matter of Kelly v. Safir, 96 N.Y.2d 32, 40, 724 N.Y.S.2d 680, 747 N.E.2d 1280 [2001] ; Matter of Pell v. Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 N.Y.2d 222, 233, 356 N.Y.S.2d 833, 313 N.E.2d 321 [1974] ).
Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Rivera, Stein, Fahey, Garcia, Wilson and Feinman concur.