Legal Opinion
Hanchard v. Facilities Development Corp.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided May 4, 1995PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*640OPINION OF THE COURT
Titone, J.
In this CPLR article 78 proceeding, petitioner claims that his termination from employment was arbitrary and capricious because respondent failed to follow its own pretermination procedures established in its Employee Handbook. Because respondent has substantially complied with its stated policies, and any departure therefrom is attributable to petitioner’s own failure to cooperate, we affirm the Appellate Division’s order dismissing the petition.
Petitioner George Hanchard, a licensed architect, began his employment with respondent Facilities Development…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Weiner v. McGraw-Hill, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1982
- Sabetay v. Sterling Drug, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1987
- Amsterdam Nursing Home Corp. v. Commissioner of New York State Department of HealthAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- Mitchell v. DowdellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
3Cited by20 opinions
- De Petris v. Union Settlement Ass'nNew York Court of Appeals · 1995
- Rooney v. TysonNew York Court of Appeals · 1998
- Daub v. Future Tech Enterprise, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- Alltow, Inc. v. Village of Wappingers FallsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Prestige Towing & Recovery, Inc. v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.