The Appellate Division sustained the appointing authority's determination that the petitioner in this CPLR Article 78 action committed fraud in his employment application by providing answers to questions under penalties of perjury that were not truthful when petitioner represented that he had never resigned from a previous job to avoid disciplinary action or dismissal, explaining that the revocation of the employee's certification for appointment more than three years after the effective date of his permanent appointment to his position was unavailing as that "statute of limitations" does not control in situation involving such a fraud on the part of the appointee.Click HERE to access the text of the Appellate Division's ruling in this matter.
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.