AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)

In the Matter of JACK DEJNOZKA, Appellant, v. CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS et al., Respondents.

MEMORANDUM.

The judgment of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the memorandum below. We would add that although the charges preferred against petitioner chiefly concerned disobedience of the Commissioner's departmental policy, the Commissioner was not obliged to disqualify himself as the hearing officer. The Commissioner had no particular knowledge of material disputed facts. Whether the actual order petitioner disobeyed originated from the Commissioner before being spoken by petitioner's superior officer is immaterial. Petitioner remained bound to follow the order. Furthermore, the Commissioner's conduct did not reflect partiality with regard to petitioner's hearing (see, e.g., People ex rel. Packwood v Riley, 232 N.Y. 283; Matter of Horton v Ames, 75 A.D.2d 853).

Chief Judge WACHTLER and Judges MEYER, SIMONS, KAYE, ALEXANDER, TITONE and HANCOCK, JR., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MATTER OF DEJNOZKA v. CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS
(Nov 13, 1986)