# Brown v. Westchester County Health Care Corp.

> Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · March 13, 2000 · 270 A.D.2d 346

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6046682

## Case

- **Full name:** In the Matter of Leesther Brown v. Westchester County Health Care Corporation
- **Court:** Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
- **Decided:** March 13, 2000
- **Citations:** 270 A.D.2d 346; 705 N.Y.S.2d 238; 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2733
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6046682

## Opinion text

—Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Edward Stolzenberg, president and chief executive officer of the Westchester County Health Care Corporation, dated January 19, 1999, which, after a hearing, inter alia, found the petitioner guilty of misconduct and incompetence and terminated her employment as a certified nurse’s attendant.
Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.
Substantial evidence in the record supports the determination by the respondent Edward Stolzenberg, president and chief executive officer of the Westchester County Health Care Corporation, that the petitioner was guilty of misconduct and incompetence within the meaning of Civil Service Law § 75 (see, CPLR 7803 [4]; 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176 ; Matter of Gradel v Lilholt, 257 AD2d 972 ; Matter of Alston v Morgan, 245 AD2d 287 ; Matter of Glinka v Town of Poughkeepsie, 209 AD2d 773 ; Matter of Romano v Town Bd., 200 AD2d 934 ; Matter of Graham v Sands, 87 AD2d 912 ). The penalty of termination of employment was not so disproportionate to the offenses committed as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness (see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222 ; Matter of Gradel v Lilholt, supra; Matter of Alston v Morgan, supra; Matter of Graham v Sands, supra).
The petitioner’s remaining contentions are without merit. Altman, J. P., Friedmann, Krausman and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6046682. Public record. Not legal advice.