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: Alexandra Bonacarti, Petitioner–Appellant, v. Mayor's Office of Criminal Justice et al., Respondents–Respondents.
Bergstein and Ullrich, New Paltz (Stephen Bergstein of counsel), for appellant.
Sylvia O. Hinds–Radix, Corporation Counsel, New York (Rebecca L. Visgaitis of counsel), for respondents.
Judgment (denominated an order), Supreme Court, New York County (Arlene Bluth, J.), entered on or about June 15, 2022, denying the petition to annul respondents' determination, dated December 10, 2021, which terminated petitioner's employment with respondent Mayor's Office of Criminal Justice, and dismissing the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
As a probationary employee, petitioner “may be discharged for any or no reason at all in the absence of a showing that ․ her dismissal was in bad faith, for a constitutionally impermissible purpose or in violation of law” (Matter of Smith v New York City Dept. of Correction, 292 A.D.2d 198, 198–199 [1st Dept 2022] [internal quotation marks omitted] ). Petitioner alleged no unlawful motive for her termination and failed to satisfy her burden of demonstrating bad faith. Petitioner's own affidavits attesting to her satisfactory job performance did not create a substantial issue of bad faith sufficient to warrant a hearing in light of respondents' submission of a termination memo documenting several performance failures, which provided a rational basis for respondents' decision (see Matter of Adelana v New York City Dept. of Educ., 194 AD3d 463, 464 [1st Dept 2021]; Matter of Francois v. Walcott, 136 AD3d 434 [1st Dept 2016] ).
We have considered petitioner's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.
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.
Docket No: Index No. 151420 /22
Decided: March 09, 2023
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)