Cyber attacks on State, local government and school district cyber security systems

In a report issued in October 2023, New York's State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli indicated that:

"Cyberattacks are a serious threat to America’s critical infrastructure and have the potential to severely impact our day-to-day lives. These incidents often result in data breaches for companies and institutions that collect large amounts of personally identifiable data. Data breaches expose New Yorkers to invasions of privacy, the possibility of identity theft and other types of fraud. Even more troubling are incidents such as ransomware or distributed denial of service attacks that have the potential to shut down systems that we rely on for water, power, health care and other necessities."

The report highlights the recent proliferation of cyberattacks, details the most common types; discusses recent efforts to respond to and prevent such attacks; and recommends a policy framework intended to help New York stay ahead of the threat presented by cyberattacks. 

The Office of the State Comptroller [OSC] noted that it is working to help avoid cyber attacks by auditing and uncovering weaknesses in State, local government and school district cyber security systems. Audits by OSC's Divisions of State Government Accountability and Local Government and School Accountability revealed dozens of ransom ware attacks and other data breach incidents that compromised New York State agencies, counties, cities, towns and villages, hospitals and public-school systems, and have identified gaps in cyber security. OSC said "Understanding and addressing these weaknesses can help New York State remain vigilant."

OCS noted that it "will continue to dedicate attention and resources to protecting New York residents and institutions from these attacks."

Click HERE to access the State Comptroller's October 2023 report.

 

Substantial evidence

The determination of appointing authority [Employer] which terminated Petitioner's employment based on the report and recommendation of an Administrative Law Judge was unanimously confirmed by the Appellate Division. 

The court noted that "Substantial evidence supports [the Employer's] determination that Petitioner violated Department directives and procedures concerning the retrieval of inmate property, engaged in undue familiarity with an inmate, failed to submit a required unusual incident report, used excessive force against an inmate, and made false and misleading statements.] 

Under the circumstances the Appellate Division opined that "The penalty of termination of petitioner's employment does not shock one's sense of fairness", citing Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 NY2d 222, among other decisions.

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

 

Employee's application seeking a religious exemption from the COVID-19 vaccination requirement for agency employees denied

The Appellate Division sustained Supreme Court's decision rejecting Plaintiff's petition seeking a court order annulling the determination of the City of New York Reasonable Accommodation Appeals Panel [Citywide Panel] denying Plaintiff's request for a religious exemption from the COVID-19 vaccination requirement for employees of the New York City Department of Education [DOE].

The Citywide Panel denied Plaintiff's administrative appeal challenging the denial of his application for a religious exemption from the vaccination requirement, finding that:

[1] "Plaintiff failed to establish that his objection to receiving any of the COVID-19 vaccines was based on a sincerely held religious belief; and 

[2] "granting the accommodation would impose an undue hardship on DOE."

Citing Matter of Marsteller v City of New York, 217 AD3d 543, the Appellate Division noted that Plaintiff:

[1] "had no demonstrated history of refusing medications or vaccines;

[2] "he admitted to receiving a certain vaccination required for him to attend college;  and 

[3] "he refused to answer a question about whether he had avoided any other vaccines or medications based on the same objection he raised to the COVID-19 vaccines."

The court also rejected Plaintiff's argument that DOE's "Position Statement" was unsigned and undated hearsay, noting "Generally, administrative proceedings need not conform to all of the ... evidentiary rules adhered to in judicial tribunals", citing Matter of Church of Scientology of N.Y. v Tax Commn. of City of N.Y., 120 AD2 376, nor need an agency "state with specificity its detailed analysis," or "point to any contemporaneously created record that demonstrates that it considered all relevant factors" or "or engage in a cooperative dialogue".

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