New York Court of Appeals, 1986

Dejnozka v. City of Saratoga Springs

New York Court of Appeals · Decided November 13, 1986

68 N.Y.2d 947; 510 N.Y.S.2d 85; 502 N.E.2d 1000; 1986 N.Y. LEXIS 20890

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

Anderson v. Dolce (District Court, S.D. New York 1987)
Schuttak v. Board of Trustees for Endicott (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1992)

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 of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The judgment of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the memorandum below. We would add that although the charges preferred against petitioner chiefly concerned disobedience of the Commissioner’s departmental policy, the Commissioner was not obliged to disqualify himself as the hearing officer. The Commissioner had no particular knowledge of material disputed facts. Whether the actual order petitioner disobeyed originated from *950the Commissioner before being spoken by petitioner’s superior officer is immaterial. Petitioner remained bound to follow the order. Furthermore, the Commissioner’s conduct did not reflect partiality with regard to petitioner’s hearing (see, e.g., People ex rel. Packwood v Riley, 232 NY 283; Matter of Horton v Ames, 75 AD2d 853).

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Meyer, Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone and Hancock, Jr., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

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