LAKE CITY POLICE CLUB v. CITY OF OSWEGO (2006)

 Petitioners commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking, inter alia, a determination that respondents are acting in violation of Civil Service Law § 58 and seeking to compel them to designate petitioner Joseph A. Brancato, Jr. and any similarly situated officer as a detective.   They contend on appeal that, upon granting their motion for reargument, Supreme Court erred in adhering to its prior determination dismissing the petition.   We affirm.   Contrary to the contention of petitioners, respondents were not required pursuant to Civil Service Law § 58(4)(c)(ii) and (iii) to designate Brancato as a detective.   Brancato established only that he had been working out-of-title as a detective in the Oswego County District Attorney's Office, and Civil Service Law § 58(5) expressly provides in relevant part that it shall not apply to “the investigatory personnel of the office of the district attorney in any county․” In any event, we further note the well-established principle that out-of-title work creates no automatic right to reclassification (see Matter of McGuinness v. New York State Off. of Ct. Admin., 61 N.Y.2d 279, 281, 473 N.Y.S.2d 387, 461 N.E.2d 873;  Matter of Blumenthal v. Bahou, 76 A.D.2d 1026, 1027, 429 N.Y.S.2d 764, affd. 54 N.Y.2d 970, 446 N.Y.S.2d 38, 430 N.E.2d 915;  Matter of Gavigan v. McCoy, 37 N.Y.2d 548, 550-551, 375 N.Y.S.2d 858, 338 N.E.2d 517;  Matter of Farrell v. Kampe, 281 A.D.2d 415, 721 N.Y.S.2d 268;  Yakkey v. County of Nassau, 121 A.D.2d 716, 717, 504 N.Y.S.2d 147).

We have considered petitioners' remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

MEMORANDUM: