New York Court of Appeals, 1978

MATTER OF GIBIDES v. Powers

New York Court of Appeals · Decided November 28, 1978 · Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke Concur

45 N.Y.2d 994; 385 N.E.2d 1043; 413 N.Y.S.2d 115; 1978 N.Y. LEXIS 2405

Cases that cite this one

6 later published cases cite this decision.

Matter of Phillips v. York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
Massaria v. Betschen (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2002)
Aston v. Rydzynski (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1985)
Smith v. Tomlinson (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1985)
Bigelow v. Board of Trustees of Gouverneur (N.Y. 1984)
Messura v. Hart (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1982)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Order of the Appellate Division reversed, with costs, and the judgment of Supreme Court, denominated an order and judgment, reinstated. It is not necessary that the town board support its dismissal of petitioner police officer with a finding of moral turpitude or deviance. On the instant charges, arising out of an automobile accident, it was found that petitioner failed to use good skill and judgment, failed to obey traffic regulations, and displayed incompetence in operating a department vehicle. In addition, in arriving at a sanction, the board recognized, as it was entitled to, that petitioner’s generally unfavorable driving record indicated, among other things, two prior personal injury motor vehicle accidents (Matter of Bal v Murphy, 43 NY2d 762). A police force, especially a small police force in a rural community, occupies a publicly exposed sensitive status, and would properly be embarrassed by repeated motor vehicle accidents involving one of its members, despite his otherwise good record in the department. Hence, it *996 cannot be said that dismissal was "so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness” (Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222, 237).

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur.

Order reversed, with costs, and the judgment of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, reinstated in a memorandum.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.