Pleading nolo contendere* to criminal charges that he had recklessly operated his personal automobile while off-duty, a New York City police officer and the New York City Police Department "settled" the subsequent disciplinary action taken against the officer by entering into a "stipulated agreement." Under the terms of the settlement agreement the officer was placed on "disciplinary probation" for a specified period. This meant that the tenure he previously enjoyed was suspended for the duration of the disciplinary probationary period agreed upon and he could be summarily dismissed at any time during the probationary period by the appointing authority without notice and hearing.
Prior to the expiration of his disciplinary probationary period the police officer arrested on assault charges and later dismissed from his position. Later still, the assault charges were withdrawn. The officer then sued, seeking a court order directing his reinstatement to his former position, an awarded of back pay and an order directing the Police Department to give him a "name-clearing hearing." Supreme Court dismissed his CPLR Article 78 petition and the officer appealed the ruling to the Appellate Division.**
Addressing the police officer's contention that he was unlawfully terminated and therefore should be reinstated to his former position with back salary and benefits, the Appellate Division said that as a probationary employee the officer could be been dismissed without a hearing or a statement of reasons. Only in the event the officer demonstrated that his dismissal was made in bad faith or was for a constitutionally prohibited reason or was prohibited by statutory or case law could the officer claim wrongful discharge.
In contrast, in the event the stipulation establishing the employee's "disciplinary probation period" sets out the acts or omissions that could trigger the individuals termination, the employee may be summarily terminate without notice and hearing only in the event he or she is found to have violated the specified term or condition stipulated in the disciplinary probationary period agreement.
This point is illustrated in ruling by the Appellate Division in Taylor
Under the terms of a disciplinary settlement,
Although the employer claimed that the termination without a hearing was permitted under the terms of the disciplinary settlement agreement, the Appellate Division disagreed and directed the agency to reinstate
The court pointed out that the reason given for summarily terminating
Agreeing with the Supreme Court justice that Green failed to prove the existence of any basis for granting the relief he sought, the Appellate Division dismissed his appeal.
* A plea by which a defendant in a criminal prosecution accepts conviction as though a guilty plea had been entered but does not admit guilt. A plea of "nolo contendere," has the same primary legal effects as a guilty plea.
** Robert Green, Jr. v. New York City Police Department et al.
The Taylor