From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of O'Garro v. Simpson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 16, 1984
100 A.D.2d 907 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)

Opinion

April 16, 1984


Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York City Transit Authority, dated October 4, 1982, which, after a hearing, found petitioner guilty of misconduct and/or incompetence and dismissed him from his position as a motorman. ¶ Petition granted to the extent that the determination is modified, on the law, by adding thereto a provision that petitioner is entitled to back pay for the period beginning 30 days after his suspension to the date of his dismissal (excluding any delay attributable to him) and excluding any sums he may have earned from other employment during that period, or from unemployment compensation. (See Matter of Johnson v Board of Trustees, 61 N.Y.2d 1014; Matter of Thompson v New York City Tr. Auth., 78 A.D.2d 543; Kearse v Fisher, 67 A.D.2d 963. ) As so modified, determination confirmed and proceeding otherwise dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements, and matter remitted to respondent to determine the amount of back pay due to petitioner. ¶ We find the record contains substantial evidence to support the charges against the petitioner, and as such, we must confirm the determination (see 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176; Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 N.Y.2d 222; Matter of Tompkins v Board of Regents, 299 N.Y. 469). In addition, the penalty imposed upon the petitioner is not so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness, especially in light of a rather extensive history of prior disciplinary warnings (see Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., supra). The petitioner has rights to back pay pursuant to subdivision 3 of section 75 Civ. Serv. of the Civil Service Law (see Matter of Johnson v Board of Trustees, supra; Matter of Sinicropi v Bennett, 60 N.Y.2d 918). Accordingly the matter is remitted to respondent to determine the exact amount of money owed to him. Titone, J.P., Lazer, Mangano and Boyers, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of O'Garro v. Simpson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 16, 1984
100 A.D.2d 907 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)
Case details for

Matter of O'Garro v. Simpson

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of MICHAEL O'GARRO, Petitioner, v. JOHN D. SIMPSON, as…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Apr 16, 1984

Citations

100 A.D.2d 907 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)

Citing Cases

Matter of Miller v. N.Y. City Transit Auth

February 24, 1986 Petition granted to the extent that the determination is modified, on the law, by adding…