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: Shazad KHAN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Raymond W. KELLY, as Police Commissioner of the New York City Police Department, et al., Respondents-Respondents.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Doris Ling-Cohan, J.), entered on or about September 7, 2004, which, to the extent appealable, denied petitioner's motion to renew his previously dismissed application pursuant to CPLR article 78 to annul a determination of respondent Commissioner terminating him without a hearing from his position as a probationary New York City Police Officer, unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs, renewal granted, and upon renewal, petitioner afforded relief only to the extent of granting his request for a name-clearing hearing, and the matter remanded for that purpose. Appeal from judgment, same court and Justice, entered April 1, 2004, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as academic in view of our determination of the appeal from the subsequent order.
Petitioner was dismissed without a hearing from his position as a probationary police officer following allegations that he had assaulted his former girlfriend. Although the new evidence upon which petitioner's motion for renewal is predicated, in which the complainant recants her allegations of abuse, does not demonstrate that petitioner's termination was accomplished in bad faith or in violation of constitutional or statutory authority, and accordingly furnishes no ground to annul the challenged dismissal (cf. Kroboth v. Sexton, 160 A.D.2d 126, 130-131, 560 N.Y.S.2d 6 [1990] ), it does indicate that the allegations evidently credited by respondents and upon which they acted against petitioner may well be false and are being used to deny petitioner other civil service employment opportunities. As respondents now concede, under these circumstances renewal should have been granted and petitioner's request for a name-clearing hearing granted (see Matter of Swinton v. Safir, 93 N.Y.2d 758, 697 N.Y.S.2d 869, 720 N.E.2d 89 [1999] ).
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: February 10, 2005
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)