ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Labor & Employment Law Blogs -> New York Public Personnel Law

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Labor & Employment Law

: New York Public Personnel Law

Name clearing hearing to rebut derogatory information in a personnel file

ADVERTISEMENTS
Name clearing hearing to rebut derogatory information in a personnel file
Sciolino v. City of Newport News, U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, 480 F.3d 642

The lesson in Sciolino is that if an individual believes that there is derogatory information in his or her personnel file and that there is a danger of such derogatory information being seen by a prospective employer or the public, such an allegation must be set out in the individual?s complaint.

Christopher Sciolino, a former probationary city police officer, sued the City of Newport News alleging that false information damaging his good name and reputation had been placed in his personnel file when he was terminated from his position and he had not been given a name-clearing hearing. This action, he contended, deprived him of liberty rights without due process of law.

The Circuit Court first observed that because Sciolino failed to allege facts asserting likelihood that prospective employers or members of the public would see the damaging information Sciolino believed was in his personnel file, the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing his complaint.

However, the district court also denied Sciolino?s motion to amend his complaint in order to meet this standard. This refusal to allow Sciolino to amend his complaint, said the Circuit Court, constituted an abuse of the lower court?s discretion.

The Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the District Court?s dismissal of Sciolino?s complaint, ruling that the lower court should have allowed him to amend his complaint ?to meet standard of alleging facts asserting likelihood that prospective employers or members of the public would see the damaging information.?

For the full text of the opinion, go to:
http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/052229.P.pdf

Full post as published by New York Public Personnel Law on September 14, 2009 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0135 secs (new cache)