ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE [AI] IS NOT USED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN PREPARING NYPPL SUMMARIES OF JUDICIAL AND QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISIONS

March 21, 2017

Disciplinary hearings held in absentia



Disciplinary hearings held in absentia
NYC Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings [OATH], Index No. 728/17

A New York City tax auditor was charged with misconduct and incompetence for performing her duties in an inefficient manner, being discourteous to her supervisor, and time and leave violations. The auditor failed to appear at trial and the hearing proceed in absentia.

The general rule in such situations is that if the employee fails to appear at the disciplinary hearing, the charging party may elect to proceed with the hearing but it must actually hold a “hearing in absentia” and prove its allegations rather then merely impose a penalty on the individual on the theory that the employee’s failure to appear at the hearing* as scheduled is, in effect, a concession of guilt.

OATH Administrative Law Judge Ingrid M. Addison conducted the hearing in "the form of an inquest" at which the Department presented the testimony the employee's supervisor, and documentary evidence.

Based on credible testimony from the auditor's supervisor and documentary evidence, Judge Addison sustained the charges. She found that the auditor’s persistent unwillingness to perform her tasks constituted incompetence as well as misconduct. The ALJ then recommended that the employee be terminated by the appointing authority.  

* N.B. The appointing authority is required to make a reasonable effort to contact the employee before proceeding to hold a disciplinary hearing in absentia. It may be that the employee has a valid excuse for his or her nonappearance such as a family emergency or personal illness that would justify the hearing officer granting an adjournment. Attempting to contact the accused, or his or her attorney,  is advisable even if the individual had announce that he or she does not intend to appear at the hearing as scheduled since he or she can elect to do so the last moment and then be prevented from being present at the proceeding as the result of some legitimate mischance or medical inability.

The decision is posted on the Internet at:

________________________

The Discipline Book - A 458 page guide to disciplinary actions involving public officers and employees. For more information click on http://booklocker.com/books/5215.html
________________________


CAUTION

Subsequent court and administrative rulings, or changes to laws, rules and regulations may have modified or clarified or vacated or reversed the decisions summarized here. Accordingly, these summaries should be Shepardized® or otherwise checked to make certain that the most recent information is being considered by the reader.
THE MATERIAL ON THIS WEBSITE IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY. AGAIN, CHANGES IN LAWS, RULES, REGULATIONS AND NEW COURT AND ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS MAY AFFECT THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS LAWBLOG. THE MATERIAL PRESENTED IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE AND THE USE OF ANY MATERIAL POSTED ON THIS WEBSITE, OR CORRESPONDENCE CONCERNING SUCH MATERIAL, DOES NOT CREATE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP.
NYPPL Blogger Harvey Randall served as Principal Attorney, New York State Department of Civil Service; Director of Personnel, SUNY Central Administration; Director of Research, Governor’s Office of Employee Relations; and Staff Judge Advocate General, New York Guard. Consistent with the Declaration of Principles jointly adopted by a Committee of the American Bar Association and a Committee of Publishers and Associations, the material posted to this blog is presented with the understanding that neither the publisher nor NYPPL and, or, its staff and contributors are providing legal advice to the reader and in the event legal or other expert assistance is needed, the reader is urged to seek such advice from a knowledgeable professional.
New York Public Personnel Law. Email: publications@nycap.rr.com