Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: Sal JENKINS, Petitioner, v. NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, et al., Respondents.
Determination of respondent New York City Department of Transportation, dated April 6, 2005, finding petitioner guilty of specified misconduct and imposing a 30-day suspension without pay (time served), unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the article 78 proceeding (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Ronald A. Zweibel, J.], entered on or about October 17, 2005) dismissed, without costs.
The Commissioner's finding that petitioner improperly or negligently performed his assigned duties by storing unassembled weapons, ammunition, holsters and cleaning equipment in a warehouse locker potentially accessible to the public was supported by substantial evidence, i.e., “such relevant proof as a reasonable mind may accept as adequate to support a conclusion or ultimate fact” (300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v. State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176, 180, 408 N.Y.S.2d 54, 379 N.E.2d 1183 [1978] ). The Commissioner was not bound by the Administrative Law Judge's findings of fact or credibility, and was free to reach her own determination, so long as it was supported by substantial evidence (Matter of Milano v. New York City Taxi & Limousine Commn., 305 A.D.2d 326, 761 N.Y.S.2d 29 [2003], appeal dismissed 100 N.Y.2d 614, 767 N.Y.S.2d 395, 799 N.E.2d 618 [2003], lv. denied 5 N.Y.3d 707, 801 N.Y.S.2d 801, 835 N.E.2d 661 [2005]; Matter of Maggiore v. Department of Bldgs. of City of N.Y., 294 A.D.2d 304, 743 N.Y.S.2d 27 [2002] ).
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: February 07, 2006
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)