April 14, 2020

Employee found guilty of violating New York City's ethics rules fined $20,000



The New York City Conflicts of Interest Board determined Plaintiff's teaching at the entity when he was scheduled to be working at DOE involved a conflict of interest and found him guilty of violating New York City's ethics rules. The penalty imposed: a fine in the amount of $20,000.

Plaintiff brought an Article 78 action challenging the Board's determination and the fine it imposed. The Appellate Division unanimously confirmed the Board's ruling and dismissed Plaintiff 's Article 78 petition.

Finding that there was no basis to disturb the credibility determinations of the Administrative Law Judge, the Appellate Division said that substantial evidence supported the Board's determination that Plaintiff's actions violated New York City Charter §§2604(b)(2) and 2604(a)(1)(b).

Addressing the Board's imposing a $20,000 penalty on Plaintiff, the Appellate Division said that the penalty imposed "does not shock one's sense of fairness in light of the egregiousness of [Plaintiff's] conduct," citing Bolt v New York City Department of Education, 30 NY3d 1065.

The decision is posted on the Internet at:

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 DOES NOT CREATE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP.
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 in this blog is presented with the understanding that neither the publisher nor members of the staff are providing legal advice to the reader and in the event legal or other expert assistance is needed, the reader is advised to seek such advice from a competent professional.