Opinion
2017–11439 Index No. 14684/16
06-12-2019
In the Matter of Jimmy WONG, Appellant, v. Joseph PONTE, etc., et al., Respondents.
Jimmy Wong, Woodside, NY, appellant pro se. Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Fay Ng and Barbara Graves–Poller of counsel), for respondents.
Jimmy Wong, Woodside, NY, appellant pro se.
Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Fay Ng and Barbara Graves–Poller of counsel), for respondents.
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., MARK C. DILLON, LEONARD B. AUSTIN, SYLVIA O. HINDS–RADIX, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York City Department of Correction dated September 15, 2016, which terminated the petitioner's probationary employment as a correction officer, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Howard G. Lane, J.), entered August 30, 2017. The judgment denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The petitioner commenced this proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York City Department of Correction which terminated his probationary employment as a correction officer.
A probationary employee may "be dismissed for almost any reason, or for no reason at all" ( Matter of Venes v. Community School Bd. of Dist. 26 , 43 N.Y.2d 520, 525, 402 N.Y.S.2d 807, 373 N.E.2d 987 ; see Matter of Duncan v. Kelly , 9 N.Y.3d 1024, 1025, 853 N.Y.S.2d 260, 882 N.E.2d 872 ; Matter of Swinton v. Safir , 93 N.Y.2d 758, 762–763, 697 N.Y.S.2d 869, 720 N.E.2d 89 ; Matter of Marshall v. Simon , 160 A.D.3d 648, 648–649, 74 N.Y.S.3d 580 ; Matter of Mathis v. New York State Dept. of Correctional Servs. , 81 A.D.3d 1435, 1436, 916 N.Y.S.2d 881 ). "The employment of a probationary employee may be terminated without a hearing and without a statement of reasons in the absence of a demonstration that the termination was in bad faith, for a constitutionally impermissible or an illegal purpose, or in violation of statutory or decisional law" ( Matter of Lane v. City of New York , 92 A.D.3d 786, 786, 938 N.Y.S.2d 597 ; see Matter of Marshall v. Simon , 160 A.D.3d at 649, 74 N.Y.S.3d 580 ; Matter of Johnson v. County of Orange , 138 A.D.3d 850, 851, 29 N.Y.S.3d 502 ).
Here, the petitioner did not demonstrate, or even adequately allege, that his employment was terminated in bad faith, for a constitutionally impermissible or an illegal purpose, or in violation of statutory or decisional law (see Matter of Marshall v. Simon , 160 A.D.3d at 649, 74 N.Y.S.3d 580 ; Matter of Johnson v. County of Orange , 138 A.D.3d at 851, 29 N.Y.S.3d 502 ; Matter of Lane v. City of New York , 92 A.D.3d at 786, 938 N.Y.S.2d 597 ). Accordingly, we agree with the Supreme Court's determination to deny the petition and dismiss the proceeding.
RIVERA, J.P., DILLON, AUSTIN and HINDS–RADIX, JJ., concur.