Case Name: In the Matter of Dorothy Acosta et al., Appellants, v. Donald H. Wollett, as Director of the Office of Employee Relations of the State of New York, et al., Respondents
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1981-12-15
Citations: 55 N.Y.2d 761
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of Dorothy Acosta et al., Appellants, v Donald H. Wollett, as Director of the Office of Employee Relations of the State of New York, et al., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 55
Pages: 761–763

Head Matter:
In the Matter of Dorothy Acosta et al., Appellants, v Donald H. Wollett, as Director of the Office of Employee Relations of the State of New York, et al., Respondents.
Argued November 17, 1981;
decided December 15, 1981
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Marjorie E. Karowe for appellants.
Robert Abrams, Attorney-General (John Q. Driscoll and Shirley Adelson Siegel of counsel), for respondents.
James R. Sandner, Susan Bloom Jones and Alan R. Liebowitz for Public Employees Federation, amicus curiae.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The judgment of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
The record contains substantial evidence to support the finding that petitioners engaged in an unjustified "concerted stoppage of work or slowdown" in violation of subdi vision 1 of section 210 of the Civil Service Law. This is not to say that the record would not have supported a contrary conclusion; but judicial review of these matters is limited. Where on the whole record the hearing officer's determination is supported by substantial evidence our review is at an end.
Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.
Judgment affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.