The doctrine of collateral estoppel bars the relitigation of a legal or factual issue that was previously decided

The doctrine of collateral estoppel bars the relitigation of a legal or factual issue that was previously decided

Washington v NYC Department of Education, USCA, 2nd Circuit, 17-3776-cv

In Grieve v Tamerin, 269 F.3d 149, the Circuit Court of Appeals said that the doctrine of collateral estoppel, also termed issue preclusion, bars re-litigation of a legal or factual issue that was previously decided where:

(1) the issues in both proceedings are identical,

(2) the issue in the prior proceeding was actually litigated and actually decided,

 (3) there was [a] full and fair opportunity to litigate in the prior proceeding, and

(4) the issue previously litigated was necessary to support a valid and final judgment on the merits.”

Further, the opinion continues, “New York courts will give administrative determinations preclusive effect if made in a quasijudicial capacity and with a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue,” citing Burkybile v. Bd. of Educ. of Hastings-On-Hudson Union Free Sch. Dist., 411 F.3d 306.

In this action Janet Washington [Plaintiff] asserted that §3020-a hearings do not result in the sort of final judgment that can give rise to collateral estoppel in federal court. The Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed, explaining that "it is well-settled that a “[S]ection 3020-a hearing is an administrative adjudication that must be given preclusive effect” when the elements of collateral estoppel are satisfied."

The Circuit Court ruled that Plaintiff's §3020-a hearing satisfies the elements of collateral estoppel and has preclusive effect as the issue of alleged unlawful discrimination was actually litigated and decided, and the arguments raised in the §3020-a hearing were identical to those briefed for the discrimination claim on appeal. Further, said the court,  Plaintiff acknowledges that the hearing officer "ruled decisively and specifically on whether [Plaintiff] suffered disability discrimination after considering the arguments from each side," concluding that Plaintiff's “evidence of actual animus is weak” and that “just cause exists for the termination of [Plaintiff’s] employment”.

In the words of the court, "[t]he Section 3020-a hearing also afforded a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue of discrimination. Plaintiff was permitted to request the production of material, call and cross-examine witnesses, and present relevant evidence...." The court acknowledged that Plaintiff had challenged certain of the arbitrator’s evidentiary decisions, but opined that "the proceeding is not rendered unfair or incomplete because some evidentiary rulings were unfavorable. "

Holding that the district court correctly concluded that the Plaintiff’s discrimination claims were collaterally estopped by the factual findings of her §3020-a hearing, the Circuit Court affirmed the lower court's ruling.

The decision is posted on the Internet at:

http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/112119e1-395f-4de2-89fe-3ac841261b89/1/doc/17-3776_so%20(2).pdf#page=3&zoom=auto,-146,394

Executive Order of the Governor protecting the personal privacy of public sector workers

Executive Order of the Governor protecting the personal privacy of public sector workers

Executive Order No. 183  [8 EO 183]

WHEREAS, the labor movement was born in New York State more than a century ago, when, in the wake of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire New York became the first state to enact laws protecting workers; and

WHEREAS, the labor movement continues to thrive in New York, which today boasts the highest rate of union membership in the country – more than double the national rate;

WHEREAS, as the voice of working people, labor built the middle class and advanced the great progressive achievements that we take for granted today – victories such as the Social Security Act, the Fair Labor Standards Act establishing the 40-hour work week, set ting a minimum wage and prohibiting child labor, the Equal Pay Act banning gender wage discrimination, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act; and

WHEREAS, across New York State and this country, workers’ personal information such as their home addresses and cell phone numbers, are being used to attack, harass, and intimidate them; and

WHEREAS, although today’s decision by the United States Supreme Court in Janus v AFSCME attempts to undermine worker safety and privacy, New York State will not subject public sector workers to the abuse of their personal information as part of a campaign to harass and intimidate workers for any reason, including engaging in union activities or looking to unionize.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, ANDREW M. CUOMO, Governor of the State of New York, by, virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the State of New York, do hereby order as follows:

A. Definitions

‘‘State entity’’ shall mean (i) all agencies and department s over which the Governor has executive authority, and (ii) all public benefit corporations, public authorities, boards, and commissions, for which the Governor appoints the Chair, the Chief Executive, or the majority of Board members, except for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.

B. Responsibilities of State Entities

No State entity, including any of its officers or employees, shall disclose: (a) the home address(es), personal telephone number(s), personal cell phone number(s), personal e-mail address(es) of a public employee, as the term ‘‘public employee’’ is defined in Article 14 of the Civil Service Law, except (i) to an employee organization that, in accordance with Article 14 of the Civil Service Law, is the certified or recognized bargaining representative of a unit of public employees; (ii) to a bona fide employee organization that, in accordance with Article 14 of the Civil Service Law, is legitimately seeking to be certified or recognized as bargaining representative of a unit of public employees solely for purposes of aiding such employee organization in obtaining certification or recognition; or (iii) to the extent compelled to do so by lawful service of process, subpoena, court order, or as otherwise required by law. 

This order shall not apply to work-related, publicly available information such as title, salary, and dates of employment.

(L.S.)

GIVEN under my hand and the Privy Seal of

the State in the City of Albany this twenty-

seventh day of June in the year two thousand

eighteen.

BY THE GOVERNOR

/S/ Andrew M. Cuomo

/s/ Melissa DeRosa

Secretary to the Governo

Executive Order of the Governor protecting the personal privacy of public sector workers

Executive Order of the Governor protecting the personal privacy of public sector workers

Executive Order No. 183  [8 EO 183]

WHEREAS, the labor movement was born in New York State more than a century ago, when, in the wake of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire New York became the first state to enact laws protecting workers; and

WHEREAS, the labor movement continues to thrive in New York, which today boasts the highest rate of union membership in the country – more than double the national rate;

WHEREAS, as the voice of working people, labor built the middle class and advanced the great progressive achievements that we take for granted today – victories such as the Social Security Act, the Fair Labor Standards Act establishing the 40-hour work week, set ting a minimum wage and prohibiting child labor, the Equal Pay Act banning gender wage discrimination, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act; and

WHEREAS, across New York State and this country, workers’ personal information such as their home addresses and cell phone numbers, are being used to attack, harass, and intimidate them; and

WHEREAS, although today’s decision by the United States Supreme Court in Janus v AFSCME attempts to undermine worker safety and privacy, New York State will not subject public sector workers to the abuse of their personal information as part of a campaign to harass and intimidate workers for any reason, including engaging in union activities or looking to unionize.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, ANDREW M. CUOMO, Governor of the State of New York, by, virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the State of New York, do hereby order as follows:

A. Definitions

‘‘State entity’’ shall mean (i) all agencies and department s over which the Governor has executive authority, and (ii) all public benefit corporations, public authorities, boards, and commissions, for which the Governor appoints the Chair, the Chief Executive, or the majority of Board members, except for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.

B. Responsibilities of State Entities

No State entity, including any of its officers or employees, shall disclose: (a) the home address(es), personal telephone number(s), personal cell phone number(s), personal e-mail address(es) of a public employee, as the term ‘‘public employee’’ is defined in Article 14 of the Civil Service Law, except (i) to an employee organization that, in accordance with Article 14 of the Civil Service Law, is the certified or recognized bargaining representative of a unit of public employees; (ii) to a bona fide employee organization that, in accordance with Article 14 of the Civil Service Law, is legitimately seeking to be certified or recognized as bargaining representative of a unit of public employees solely for purposes of aiding such employee organization in obtaining certification or recognition; or (iii) to the extent compelled to do so by lawful service of process, subpoena, court order, or as otherwise required by law. 

This order shall not apply to work-related, publicly available information such as title, salary, and dates of employment.

(L.S.)

GIVEN under my hand and the Privy Seal of

the State in the City of Albany this twenty-

seventh day of June in the year two thousand

eighteen.

BY THE GOVERNOR

/S/ Andrew M. Cuomo

/s/ Melissa DeRosa

Secretary to the Governo