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.
Matter of Thomas CHIARELLY, Petitioner, v. WATERTOWN CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION and Terry N. Fralick, Superintendent of Schools, Respondents.
In this CPLR article 78 proceeding, petitioner challenges the determination of respondent Watertown City School District Board of Education (Board) terminating him from his position as a cleaner at the Watertown High School. We reject the contention of petitioner that the Board's decision to terminate him was arbitrary and capricious for failure to set forth the factual reasons for termination. The Board was entitled to rely on and adopt the findings of fact and recommendations of the Hearing Officer who conducted petitioner's hearing pursuant to Civil Service Law § 75 (see Matter of Massaria v. Betschen, 290 A.D.2d 602, 604, 734 N.Y.S.2d 740), and, as evidenced by the affidavit of Deltra Willis, the Board's president, the Board did so. In the absence of any evidence from petitioner that the Board made no independent appraisal of the evidence and reached no independent conclusion, we decline to disturb the Board's determination (see Matter of Pignato v. City of Rochester, 288 A.D.2d 825, 826, 732 N.Y.S.2d 302, appeal dismissed 97 N.Y.2d 725, 740 N.Y.S.2d 696, 767 N.E.2d 153, lv. denied 98 N.Y.2d 604, 746 N.Y.S.2d 278, 773 N.E.2d 1016; see also Matter of Monahan v. Delaware-Chenango-Madison-Otsego Bd. of Coop. Educ. Servs., 27 A.D.3d 995, 996, 811 N.Y.S.2d 231). We reject petitioner's further contention that the Hearing Officer's findings of fact and recommendations are not based on substantial evidence (see Matter of Barhite v. Village of Medina, 23 A.D.3d 1114, 1115, 804 N.Y.S.2d 526; see also 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v. State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176, 179, 408 N.Y.S.2d 54, 379 N.E.2d 1183). Finally, the penalty of termination is not so disproportionate to the offenses as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness (see Matter of Waldren v. Town of Islip, 6 N.Y.3d 735, 736-737, 810 N.Y.S.2d 408, 843 N.E.2d 1148; Matter of Pell v. Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 N.Y.2d 222, 233, 356 N.Y.S.2d 833, 313 N.E.2d 321).
It is hereby ORDERED that the determination be and the same hereby is unanimously confirmed without costs and the petition is dismissed.
MEMORANDUM:
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: November 17, 2006
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth 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)