IN RE: Lakeisha Turner

Reset A A Font size: Print

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

IN RE: Lakeisha Turner, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Martin F. Horn, Correction Commissioner of the New York City Department of Correction, et al., Respondents-Respondents.

2052

Decided: January 26, 2010

Tom, J.P., Saxe, Nardelli, Renwick, Freedman, JJ. Robert Ligansky, New York, for appellant. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Janet L. Zaleon of counsel), for respondents.

_

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Emily Jane Goodman, J.), entered January 15, 2009, which denied the petition for a judgment annulling respondents' determination to terminate petitioner's probationary employment and dismissed the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

A probationary employee may be discharged without a hearing or a statement of reasons, in the absence of a demonstration that her termination was made in bad faith, for a constitutionally impermissible purpose, or in violation of statutory or decisional law (see Matter of York v. McGuire, 63 N.Y.2d 760, 761 [1984];  Matter of Cipolla v. Kelly, 26 AD3d 171 [2006] ).   Respondent terminated petitioner's probationary employment following an investigation which concluded, based on substantial evidence in the record, that she had failed to comply with departmental rules and regulations pertaining to “undue familiarity” with current or former inmates (see Matter of Medina v. Sielaff, 182 A.D.2d 424, 427-428 [1992] ).   In this proceeding, petitioner submitted evidence challenging the investigators' conclusion, but did not submit any evidence raising a substantial issue as to respondents' bad faith in investigating the alleged violation or in deciding to terminate her employment, which would require a hearing (see Matter of Bradford v New York City Dept. of Correction, 56 AD3d 290 [2008], lv denied 12 NY3d 711 [2009] ).   Accordingly, there is no basis to interfere with respondents' determination and no issue requiring a hearing.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

_

CLERK