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

December 05, 2023

Employee required to demonstrate his objection to receiving COVID-19 vaccines is based on a sincerely held religious belief

In this challenge to a denial of the employee's [Petitioner] request for a religious exemption from the COVID-19 vaccination requirement for employees of the City of New York, brought pursuant to CPLR Article 78, the Appellate Division unanimously affirmed the Citywide Panel's determination denying the Petitioner's application for the exemption.

The court said the Petitioner had failed to demonstrate that the Citywide Panel's determination was arbitrary and capricious or made in violation of lawful procedure as the Citywide Panel had a rational basis for denying Petitioner's administrative appeal from the denial of his application for a religious exemption from the vaccination requirement, based on the Citywide Panel's findings that: Petitioner:

1. Petitioner failed to establish that his objection to receiving any of the COVID-19 vaccines was based on a sincerely held religious belief, given that he "had no demonstrated history of refusing medications or vaccines" other than declining to receive flu vaccinations for unspecified reasons; and 

2. Petitioner failed to address whether he had "avoided any other vaccines or medications based on the same objection he raised to the COVID-19 vaccines". 

Citing Matter of Marsteller v City of New York, 217 AD3d 543, the Appellate Division noted "It is not dispositive that the Citywide Panel's determination did not set forth any reasoning; a member of the Panel clarified the basis for the determination in an affirmation submitted in the article 78 proceeding".

Click HERE to access the Appellate Division's decision posted on the Internet.

 

 

CAUTION

Subsequent court and administrative rulings, or changes to laws, rules and regulations may have modified or clarified or vacated or reversed the information and, or, decisions summarized in NYPPL. For example, New York State Department of Civil Service's Advisory Memorandum 24-08 reflects changes required as the result of certain amendments to §72 of the New York State Civil Service Law to take effect January 1, 2025 [See Chapter 306 of the Laws of 2024]. Advisory Memorandum 24-08 in PDF format is posted on the Internet at https://www.cs.ny.gov/ssd/pdf/AM24-08Combined.pdf. Accordingly, the information and case 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