Opinion
February 8, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Brown, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with one bill of costs payable to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.
The petitioner, a police officer employed by the Village of East Hampton, asserts that by virtue of his performing the duties of Police Sergeant as an out-of-title employee coupled with his position on a certified eligibility list, he was entitled to a permanent appointment to that position. However, the petitioner concedes that he was never appointed on either a provisional or temporary basis. We are unable to conclude that the petitioner acquired any right to the desired permanent appointment as a result of the factors cited by him (see, Matter of Goldhirsch v Krone, 18 N.Y.2d 178, 184, 186; Hurley v Board of Educ., 270 N.Y. 275, 279; Matter of McGuinness v New York State Off. of Ct. Admin., 96 A.D.2d 561, 563, affd 61 N.Y.2d 279; Matter of Hartley v Human Resources Admin., 132 A.D.2d 699, 700; cf., Matter of Spindel v New York City Hous. Auth., 41 Misc.2d 363).
Moreover, the petitioner's remedy for his alleged assignment to out-of-title work as a Police Sergeant in violation of Civil Service Law § 61 (2) would be to seek an order directing the respondents to discontinue such assignment (see, Matter of Sheridan v Kennedy, 8 N.Y.2d 794; Matter of Gates Keystone Club v Roche, 106 A.D.2d 877; Matter of Clifford v Police Commr. of City of N.Y., 2 A.D.2d 674).
We have examined the petitioner's remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Bracken, J.P., Balletta, Eiber and Copertino, JJ., concur.