IN RE ARTHUR MONTO et al.

 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-6730-04T56730-04T5

IN RE ARTHUR MONTO and

WILLIAM KARASIK, SPARTA TOWNSHIP

_________________________________________

 

Submitted June 26, 2006 - Decided July 24, 2006

Before Judges Collester and Weissbard.

On appeal from a Final Decision of the New

Jersey Merit System Board, Department of

Personnel, Docket Nos. 2005-3302 and

2005-3303.

Jacobs & Barbone, attorneys for petitioners

(Erika A. Appenzeller, on the brief).

Purcell, Ries, Shannon, Mulcahy & O'Neill,

attorneys for respondent, Sparta Township

(John M. Bowens, on the brief).

Zulima V. Farber, Attorney General, attorney for

respondent, New Jersey Merit System Board

(Pamela N. Ullman, Deputy Attorney General,

on the brief).

PER CURIAM

Plaintiffs Arthur Monto and William Karasik appeal from a July 13, 2005 final agency decision of the Merit System Board, raising the following issues:

POINT I

THE MERIT SYSTEM BOARD ERRED IN DENYING APPELLANTS' REQUEST FOR HEARING AS MATERIAL ISSUES OF FACT EXISTED REGARDING THE DEFECTIVE FINAL NOTICES OF DISCIPLINARY ACTION

A. Disciplinary Charges Which Are Brought In Direct Violation Of State Statute Are Null And Void As A Matter Of Law And Cannot Form The Basis To Terminate A Police Officer

POINT II

IN LIGHT OF POINT I, SUPRA, THE MERIT SYSTEM BOARD ERRED IN DISMISSING APPELLANTS' APPEAL ON THE BASIS OF TIMELINESS

We have considered these contentions in light of the record and applicable law, and find them without sufficient merit to warrant extended discussion in a written opinion. R. 2:11-3 (e)(1)(D) and (E). We affirm substantially for the reasons expressed by the Merit System Board in its written decision of July 13, 2005.

Affirmed.

 

(continued)

(continued)

2

A-6730-04T5

July 24, 2006