Case ID: ny3d_2/html/0731-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Memorandum.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

[812 NE2d 1250, 780 NYS2d 302]
    In the Matter of Richard Kreisler, Appellant, v New York City Transit Authority, Respondent.
    Decided May 6, 2004
    
      APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
    
      Robert Ligansky, New York City, for appellant.
    
      Martin B. Schabel, Brooklyn, and Victor M. Levy for respondent.
   OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

An administrative penalty must be upheld unless it “is so disproportionate to the offense . . . as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness,” thus constituting an abuse of discretion as a matter of law (Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222, 237 [1974] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Under the circumstances of this case, it cannot be concluded, as a matter of law, that the penalty of demotion shocks the judicial conscience. Petitioner’s remaining contentions lack merit.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges G.B. Smith, Ciparick, Rosenblatt, Graffeo, Read and R.S. Smith concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.