Opinion
92695
Decided and Entered: March 6, 2003.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Hester Jr., J.), entered May 8, 2002 in Delaware County, which dismissed petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent denying petitioner's request for a hearing pursuant to Civil Service Law § 75.
Levene, Gouldin Thompson L.L.P. (Sam P. Monachino of counsel), for appellant.
Hogan Sarzynski L.L.P., Binghamton (John P. Lynch of counsel), for respondent.
Before: Mercure, J.P., Spain, Carpinello, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Petitioner is a school bus driver employed by respondent. In this proceeding, he claims that he was disciplined without the procedural protections afforded under Civil Service Law § 75 when respondent failed to reassign him to a particular bus run for the 2001-2002 school year. We are unpersuaded. The subject bus run, which was assigned on a year-to-year basis, was not part of petitioner's regular duties; rather, it was an additional assignment for which he received supplemental income. Although the additional run was not reassigned to petitioner because of his conduct toward certain students the previous year, petitioner was not dismissed (compare Matter of Kelly v. Evans, 294 A.D.2d 924, lv denied 98 N.Y.2d 614), did not suffer a reduction in title, grade, regular annual salary or benefits (see Matter of Galatti v. County of Dutchess, 64 N.Y.2d 1163; Matter of Gibbone v. Fire Dept. of City of N.Y., 123 A.D.2d 693; compare Bailey v. Susquehanna Val. Cent. School Dist. Bd. of Educ., 276 A.D.2d 963; Matter of Campbell v. New York City Tr. Auth., 253 A.D.2d 813, lv denied 93 N.Y.2d 805; Matter of Borrell v. County of Genesee, 73 A.D.2d 386) and was not otherwise subject to disciplinary action, such as suspension (compare Matter of Campbell v. New York City Tr. Auth., supra). Thus, Civil Service Law § 75 was not implicated and Supreme Court properly dismissed the proceeding. Furthermore, petitioner has not identified any statutory or regulatory provision which confers upon him a constitutionally protected property interest in the continued assignment of the disputed bus run (see Bykofsky v. Hess, 107 A.D.2d 779, 781-782, affd 65 N.Y.2d 730, cert denied 474 U.S. 995; Matter of Voorhis v. Warwick Val. Cent. School Dist., 92 A.D.2d 571).
Mercure, J.P., Spain, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.