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

Labor & Employment Law

: New York Public Personnel Law

Employee dismissed after being found guilty of 14 of 16 allegations of misconduct by the Civil Service Law Section 75 hearing officer

Employee dismissed after being found guilty of 14 of 16 allegations of misconduct by the Civil Service Law Section 75 hearing officer
Matter of Roth v Manhasset Union Free School Dist., 60 AD3d 771

Jeffrey S. Roth, an audio-visual technician employed by Manhasset Union Free School District, was served with disciplinary charges alleging that he was guilty of 16 acts of misconduct.

These charges included allegations that he made false or misleading statements concerning his employment status with the District; that he had physically threatening other District employees; that he had made inappropriate comments of a sexual nature to students; and that he had failed to follow lawful directives of his immediate supervisor directing him ?to refrain from being alone with students.?

The hearing officer found Roth guilty of 14 of the 16 charges; the District imposed dismissal as the penalty for Roth?s misconduct.

In response to Roth?s appeal, the Appellate Division said:

1. The review of administrative determinations in employee disciplinary cases made as a result of a hearing required by Civil Service Law § 75 is limited to a consideration of whether the determination is supported by substantial evidence;

2. Substantial evidence has been defined as "such relevant proof as a reasonable mind may accept as adequate to support a conclusion or ultimate fact"; and

3. It is the function of the administrative agency or the Hearing Officer, not the reviewing court, to weigh the evidence or assess the credibility of witnesses and determine which testimony to accept and which to reject.

Concluding that the District?s determination was " supported by substantial evidence,? the Appellate Division sustained the penalty imposed by the District, commenting that "the imposed penalty of dismissal was not so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness or shocking to the judicial conscience? ? the Pell standard [Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 NY2d 222].

Full post as published by New York Public Personnel Law on February 18, 2010 (boomark / email).