Legal Opinion
Hurwitz v. Perales
New York Court of Appeals
Decided April 29, 1993PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*185OPINION OF THE COURT
Hancock, Jr., J.
The issue in this case is whether the pretermination opportunity to be heard afforded petitioner comported with the requirements of due process. In Matter of Prue v Hunt (78 NY2d 364), we held that in the context of termination from civil service employment under Civil Service Law § 73, due process requires notice and "some opportunity to respond” (id., at 369). We now address the companion question of what process is due at the pretermination stage. On transfer from the Supreme Court, the Appellate Division determined that petitioner was not provided…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Cleveland Board of Education v. LoudermillSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Prue v. HuntNew York Court of Appeals · 1991
- Hurwitz v. PeralesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
3Cited by17 opinions
- Uniform Firefighters of Cohoes v. City of CohoesNew York Court of Appeals · 2000
- Gaines v. New York State Division for YouthAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- Lynn v. Town of ClarkstownAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- Vadell v. City of New York Health & Hospitals Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
- Gooshaw v. Village of MassenaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.