Legal Opinion · Dissent
Samuelsen v. New York City Transit Authority
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 20, 2012Published
1Dissent
Catterson and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.,
dissent in a memorandum by Catterson, J., as follows: I must respectfully dissent. There are fundamental differences arising out of the civil service protections accruing to New York City Transit Authority (hereinafter referred to as TA) employees in crucial areas of employment, namely hiring, promotion, suspension, termination and retirement pensions. Manhattan and Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority (hereinafter referred to as MaBSTOA) employees do not and cannot enjoy the same civil service protections, and as set forth more fully below, the 2002…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Leader v. Maroney, Ponzini & SpencerNew York Court of Appeals · 2001
- Long v. Adirondack Park AgencyNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
- Collins v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating AuthorityNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- Branford House, Inc. v. MichettiNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
- Public Service Commission v. New York Central RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.