A New York State Supreme Court Judge denied Plaintiff's CPLR Article 78 petition seeking a court order annulling a New York City Police Department [NYPD] decision not to issue Plaintiff, a NYPD retiring police officer, his badge and, or, a "good guy letter" affirming his right to carry a firearm upon his retirement from NYPD. The Court, however, granted NYPD's cross-motion to dismiss the Plaintiff's petition as untimely and dismissed the Article 78 proceeding.
Plaintiff appealed the Supreme Court's ruling, but the Appellate Division unanimously affirmed the Supreme Court's decision. Plaintiff subsequently applied for a retiree handgun license, which NYPD denied because Plaintiff did not have a "good guy letter".
Citing Matter of Baloy v Kelly, 92 AD3d 521 and other New York State court decisions, the Appellate Division noted that NYPD's written denial of Plaintiff's application was a "final and binding" determination and the four-month statute of limitations began to run, at the latest, upon Plaintiff's receipt of the denial. In addition, the Appellate Division's decision notes that the possibility of Plaintiff obtaining administrative relief had been exhausted when Plaintiff retired "without a change in his [modified] duty status".
The Appellate Division then pointed out that although Plaintiff had sent NYPD a written request for reconsideration of NYPD's determination, to NYPD which had not respond, that communication did not extend the statute of limitations nor did the letter "give rise to a proceeding for mandamus to compel NYPD 'to perform its duty'" (see CPLR 217 [1]).
Noting that Plaintiff did not assert any clear legal right to a good guy letter, which NYPD declined to issue in its exercise of its discretion, the Appellate Division held Petitioner "cannot circumvent the statute of limitations by demanding that [NYPD] change its determination and seeking mandamus to compel [it so do] when that demand is refused".
Click HERE to access the Appellate Division's decision posted on the Internet.