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: Police Officer Braulio BATISTA, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Raymond KELLY, Police Commissioner of the City of New York, Respondent-Respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael D. Stallman, J.), entered February 13, 2004, which granted respondent's cross motion to dismiss the petition brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 to annul respondent's determination terminating petitioner's employment as a probationary police officer, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Since petitioner has no tenable claim that his dismissal from his probationary position results from bad faith on respondent's part, the motion to dismiss the petition was properly granted (see Matter of Johnson v. Katz, 68 N.Y.2d 649, 505 N.Y.S.2d 64, 496 N.E.2d 223 [1986] ). Indeed, far from demonstrating bad faith, the record discloses that there was a rational basis for the challenged determination. By his own admission, petitioner parked illegally while off duty and tried to use his position to obtain a favor from a traffic enforcement agent. Respondent was entitled to conclude that petitioner exercised poor judgment in escalating the situation (see Matter of Sierra v. McGuire, 60 N.Y.2d 720, 469 N.Y.S.2d 74, 456 N.E.2d 1196 [1983] ). Police officers can be held to higher standards than ordinary civil service employees (see e.g. Matter of Shedlock v. Connelie, 66 A.D.2d 433, 435, 414 N.Y.S.2d 55 [1979], affd. 48 N.Y.2d 943, 425 N.Y.S.2d 95, 401 N.E.2d 217 [1979] ), and substantial deference is due to the Police Commissioner's disciplinary determinations (see e.g. Trotta v. Ward, 77 N.Y.2d 827, 566 N.Y.S.2d 199, 567 N.E.2d 241 [1991] ).
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: March 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)