§Why CasetextPricing

In the Matter of Chenango Forks Central School District, Appellant,v.New York State Public Employment Relations Board et al., Respondents.

Brief

28 Cited authorities

  1. Pell v. Board of Education

    34 N.Y.2d 222 (N.Y. 1974)   Cited 5,554 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Discussing the standard of review in an Article 78 appeal

  2. Matter of Berenhaus v. Ward

    70 N.Y.2d 436 (N.Y. 1987)   Cited 880 times
    Holding that it is axiomatic that credibility determinations are best made by the person who actually sees and hears the witness, as the courts are "disadvantaged . . . because their review is confined to a lifeless record."

  3. Matter of Gray v. Adduci

    73 N.Y.2d 741 (N.Y. 1988)   Cited 125 times
    Stating that "[h]earsay evidence can be the basis of an administrative determination"

  4. Bd. of Educ., Huntington v. Teachers

    30 N.Y.2d 122 (N.Y. 1972)   Cited 149 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Huntington, we held that a lumpsum retirement incentive was not a feature of a "retirement system", which section 113 of the Retirement and Social Security Law forbade the municipality to create, because it was compensation for services actually rendered.

  5. Incorporated Village of Lynbrook v. New York State Public Employment Relations Board

    48 N.Y.2d 398 (N.Y. 1979)   Cited 111 times
    Evaluating PERB determination

  6. Matter of City of Watertown

    95 N.Y.2d 73 (N.Y. 2000)   Cited 57 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Noting that "absent clear evidence that the Legislature intended otherwise, the presumption is that all terms and conditions of employment are subject to mandatory bargaining"

  7. Board of Education of City School District v. New York State Public Employment Relations Board

    75 N.Y.2d 660 (N.Y. 1990)   Cited 65 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing that "in a few instances, however, what might otherwise be negotiable terms and conditions of employment are prohibited from being collectively bargained. For example, a statute may direct that certain action be taken by the employer, leaving no room for negotiation."

  8. JMH, Inc. v. New York State Liquor Authority

    61 A.D.3d 1260 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)   Cited 18 times

    No. 505876. April 23, 2009. Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review two determinations of respondent which revoked petitioner's liquor license. David Brickman, Albany, for petitioner. Mark D. Frering, New York State Liquor Authority, Albany, for respondent. Before: Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Malone Jr. and McCarthy, JJ. Kavanagh, J. In November 2007, respondent filed two sets of charges against petitioner alleging

  9. Manhasset Un. v. N.Y. State Pub

    61 A.D.3d 1231 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)   Cited 16 times

    No. 505344. April 23, 2009. Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent Public Employment Relations Board which held that petitioner violated Civil Service Law § 209-a (1) (d) by transferring unit work to outside contractors. Seyfarth Shaw, L.L.P., New York City (Peter A. Walker of counsel), for petitioner. David P. Quinn, New York State Public Employment Relations Board, Albany

  10. Newark Valley Central School District v. Public Employment Relations Board

    83 N.Y.2d 315 (N.Y. 1994)   Cited 30 times
    Holding that issue of whether a school district's duty to negotiate a smoking policy was preempted by statute or policy is a question of law that must be independently examined by courts

  11. Section 212.4 - Formal hearing

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 4 § 212.4

    (a) A formal hearing for the purpose of taking evidence relevant to the case before the agency shall be conducted as necessary by the administrative law judge designated by the director. At any time, an administrative law judge may be substituted by the director for the administrative law judge previously assigned. (b) The hearing will not be adjourned unless good and sufficient grounds are established by the requesting party, who shall file, consistent with the manner in which the petition was filed