38 A.D.3d 482 SupremeCourt, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.. ~ ~
PATROLMEN’S BENEVOLEN9i ASSOCIATION. OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, INC:, Petitioner—Appellant,
y.. The NEW YORK CITY BOARD OF COLLECTIVE
BARGAINING, et al., Respondents—Respondents.
:‘
seq.
1 Case that cites this headnote
et
Patrick Lynch, as President of the Patrolmen’s Bene~ olent Association of the City of New York, Inc., et al., Plaintiffs—Appellants,
V. Raymond W. Kelly, in his official capacity as Police
Commissioner of the Police Department of the City of New York, et al., Defendants—Respondents.
March 29, 2007.
s~ nopsis Background: Patrolmen’s association and certain members appealed from orders of the Supreme Court, New York County, Marcy S. Friedman, 3., which denied association’s article 78 petition and dismissed association member’s complaint premised on the same allegation.
Holdings: The Supreme Court, Appellate Division held that:
patrolmen’s association had a full and fair opportunity to be heard in the administrative and ensuing article 78 proceedings, and
outcome of the administrative proceeding was binding on the association’s individual members in a subsequent action.
Affirmed. Procedural Posture(s): On Appeal.
West Headnotes (2) [1] Labor and Employmen
WESTLAW
Hearing
[2)
Labor and Employmen
Hearing
Even though the New York City Board of Collective Bargaining did not hold an
evidentiary hearing and decided patrolmen’s association’s claim based upon the submissions, the outcome of the administrative proceeding was binding on the association’s individual members in a subsequent action.
Attorneys and Law Firms **96 Gleason, Dunn, Walsh & O’Shea, Albany (Ronald G. Dunn of counsel), for appellants.
Steven C. Decosta, New York (John F. Wirenius of counsel), for The New York City Board of Collective Bargaining and Marlene A. Gold, respondents.
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Drake A. Colley of counsel), for municipal respondents.
MAZZARELLI, J.P., WILLIAMS, CATTERSON, KAVANAGH, 33.
Opinion
GONZALEZ,
*482 Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marcy S. Friedman, *483 J.), entered August 17, 2005, which denied the petition pursuant to CPLR article 78, alleging, inter alia, that the New York City Police Department’s Performance Monitoring Program (PMP) constituted a form of discipline, and order, same court and Justice, entered January 4, 2006, which, in a subsequent action,
© 2023 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Work~
Patrolmen’s Benev. Ass’n of the City of New York, Inc. v..., 38 A.D.3d 482 (2007) 834 N.Y.S.2d 95, 2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 02674
granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint premised on the same allegation, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
fl 2J In the above-captioned article 78 proceeding commenced by the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association (PBA) against the New York City Board of Collective Bargaining (BCB) as well as the underlying administrative proceeding, the PBA argued that PMP constituted discipline. The issue was litigated and squarely decided administratively, and the administrative determination rejecting the PBA’s contention was properly upheld in the appealed August 17, 2005 order as neither arbitrary nor capricious. Contrary to plaintiffs’ arguments, the PBA had a full and fair opportunity to be heard in the administrative and ensuing article 78 proceedings, even though the BCB did not hold an evidentiary hearing and decided the matter based upon the submissions (see Matter of Goldman v. New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 228 A.D.2d 192, 643_N.Y.S.2d 99 [1996]1jv. denied 89 N.Y.2d 805. 653
Enc~ o~ D~cjment
N.Y.S.2d 917. 676 N.E.2d 499 [1996] ). The outcome of those proceedings is binding on the individual plaintiffs in the subsequent action (see C’astellano ~ City ofNew York, 251 A.D.2d 194, 674 N.Y.S.2d 364 [1998], lv. denied 92 N.Y.2d 817, 684 N.Y.S.2d 489, 707 N.E.2d 444 [1998]. cert. denied **97 526 U.S. 1131, 119 S.Ct. 1804, 143 L.Ed.2d 1008 [1999] ). Inasmuch as both the proceeding pursuant to article 78 and the subsequent action turn upon the identical issue, our affirmance of the petition’s denial dictates an affirmance of the action’s dismissal.
We have reviewed appellants’ remaining arguments and fmd them unavailing.
All Citations 38 A.D.3d 482, 834 N.Y.S.2d 95, 2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 02674
2O2~,hD-sDn Re~j~s. ~
.‘
~ ~