Disanza v. Town Board of Cortlandt
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
A public employer may abolish civil service positions for the purpose of economy or efficiency (see Matter of Hritz-Seifts v Town of Poughkeepsie, 22 AD3d 493 [2005]; Matter of Rose v City of Newburgh, 239 AD2d 587 [1997]). One who challenges the validity of such an act has the burden of proving that the employer did not act in good faith in abolishing the position (see Matter of Hritz-Seifts v Town of Poughkeepsie, 22 AD3d at 493; Matter of Rose v City of Newburgh, 239 AD2d at 588; Matter of Rosenthal v Gilroy, 208 AD2d 748, 749 [1994]; see also Matter of Aldazabal v Carey, 44 NY2d 787, 788…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Linney v. City of PlattsburghAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- Rosenthal v. GilroyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- Civil Service Employees Ass'n v. Rockland County Board of Cooperative Educational ServicesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- Dance Magic, Inc. v. Pike Realty, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- Hritz-Seifts v. Town of PoughkeepsieAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Imburgia v. ProcopioAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Clarson v. City of Long BeachAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- Eugenio v. City of YonkersAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Imburgia v. ProcopioAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Matter of Colabella v. Town of EastchesterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.