[Download] "Matter Russell Reeves v. Simeon Golar" by Supreme Court of New York # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Matter Russell Reeves v. Simeon Golar
- Author : Supreme Court of New York
- Release Date : January 27, 1974
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 64 KB
Description
This is an article 78 proceeding wherein petitioner seeks review of respondents termination of his employment as a probationary patrolman of the New York City Housing Authority on the ground that this determination is arbitrary and capricious. By letter dated June 27, 1972, subscribed by respondent Daniel J. Daly in his capacity as Chief of Housing Police, petitioner was informed of the termination of his services. The ground for termination is delineated therein as "unsatisfactory service during your probationary period". However, respondents in this proceeding admit the following: (1) petitioner was temporarily suspended from his employment on June 2, 1972, on the alleged ground that analysis of his urine had disclosed traces of quinine and morphine and that he was, accordingly, under suspicion as a user of narcotic drugs; (2) petitioner at all times declared that he has never unlawfully partaken of any narcotic drug; (3) shortly after the suspension, petitioner was given an informal hearing wherein, accompanied by his mother and counsel, petitioner attempted to explain the presence of traces of quinine and morphine as due to medications administered by his mother; (4) petitioners counsels requests that copies of the test reports which allegedly disclosed quinine and morphine be produced and that the housing police authorize a thorough medical examination of petitioner to resolve the issue, were refused. On this record, therefore, it is patent that at no time and in no manner did respondents assert that petitioners service during the probationary period was inadequate other than as the purported basis for termination set forth in the letter notifying petitioner of same. Reason dictates and the search for truth warrants concluding that petitioners termination, occurring as it did immediately after the hearing, was grounded on the only charge asserted at the hearing, to wit, suspected use of narcotic drugs. Indeed, on this appeal respondents contend that the unexplained presence of narcotic drugs in petitioners urine and his failure to refute the laboratory findings, justified petitioners termination as an unsatisfactory employee.