From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tomaka v. Evans-Brant Central School District

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Sep 19, 1985
484 N.E.2d 1049 (N.Y. 1985)

Summary

In Tomaka v. Evans-Brant Cent. School Dist. (65 N.Y.2d 1048), it was held that a letter of reprimand placed in an employee's file did not constitute a reprimand within the meaning of Civil Service Law § 75. It follows then that oral counseling, such as was administered in the instant case, is also not discipline within the provisions of Civil Service Law § 75. Thus, petitioner was not disciplined twice and double jeopardy considerations do not apply.

Summary of this case from Matter of Yerry v. Ulster County

Opinion

Decided September 19, 1985

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department, George F. Francis, J.

Ronald L. Jaros for appellant.

Phillip Brothman for respondent.


On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 N.Y.CRR 500.4), order affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the memorandum at the Appellate Division ( 107 A.D.2d 1078).

Concur: Chief Judge WACHTLER and Judges JASEN, MEYER, SIMONS, KAYE, ALEXANDER and TITONE.


Summaries of

Tomaka v. Evans-Brant Central School District

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Sep 19, 1985
484 N.E.2d 1049 (N.Y. 1985)

In Tomaka v. Evans-Brant Cent. School Dist. (65 N.Y.2d 1048), it was held that a letter of reprimand placed in an employee's file did not constitute a reprimand within the meaning of Civil Service Law § 75. It follows then that oral counseling, such as was administered in the instant case, is also not discipline within the provisions of Civil Service Law § 75. Thus, petitioner was not disciplined twice and double jeopardy considerations do not apply.

Summary of this case from Matter of Yerry v. Ulster County
Case details for

Tomaka v. Evans-Brant Central School District

Case Details

Full title:JOYCE TOMAKA, Appellant, v. EVANS-BRANT CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, Sued as…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Sep 19, 1985

Citations

484 N.E.2d 1049 (N.Y. 1985)
484 N.E.2d 1049
494 N.Y.S.2d 697

Citing Cases

Matter of Yerry v. Ulster County

Addressing petitioner's double jeopardy assertion, we hold that the fact that petitioner was orally counseled…

Matter of Heslop v. Board of Education

We confirm. Initially, we disagree with petitioner's contention that the March 7, 1991 incident involving…