2.105 - C. Civil Service Law § 75

• Jurisdiction: New York

c. Civil Service Law § 75

The pretermination procedures for misconduct and incompetence, presently contained in § 75 of the Civil Service Law, were originally enacted to prevent interference with a public employee’s tenure for political, partisan or personal reasons.¹³¹⁴

In Girard v. City of Glens Falls,¹³¹⁵ the disciplinary termination of a firefighter for engaging in political activity, in violation of a city charter provision, was vacated based upon the unfairness of the Civil Service Law § 75 hearing as well as undisputed evidence supporting the defense of selective enforcement. Similarly, in Sheehan v. Kelly,¹³¹⁶ the termination of a police officer for his conduct during an off-duty demonstration was affirmed. The court ruled that the termination was not due to his participation in the political demonstration but rather his obstruction of traffic on the Brooklyn Bridge during the demonstration.

The statutory procedures of Civil Service Law § 75, as well as the scope of judicial review, render it an inhospitable forum for a public employee to litigate motivational issues surrounding the issuance of disciplinary charges.¹³¹⁷

--------

Notes:

^[1314] . People ex rel. Fonda v. Morton, 148 N.Y. 156, 42 N.E. 538 (1896); Anderson v. Dolce, 653 F. Supp. 1556, 1560–62 (S.D.N.Y. 1987).

^[1315] . 173 A.D.2d 113, 577 N.Y.S.2d 496 (3d Dep’t 1991), appeal denied, 79 N.Y.2d 757, 583 N.Y.S.2d 193 (1992).

^[1316] . 215 A.D.2d 171, 626 N.Y.S.2d 129 (1st Dep’t 1995).

^[1317] . Town of Huntington v. N.Y. State Div. of Human Rights, 181 A.D.2d 827, 581 N.Y.S.2d 381 (1992), rev’d, 82 N.Y.2d 783, 604 N.Y.S.2d 541 (1993).