Matter of City of New York v New York City Civ. Serv. Commn.

Matter of City of New York v New York City Civ. Serv. Commn. 2007 NY Slip Op 04045 [40 AD3d 325] May 10, 2007 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, July 11, 2007

In the Matter of City of New York et al., Appellants,
v
New York City Civil Service Commission, Respondent, et al., Respondent.

—[*1] Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Sharyn Rootenberg of counsel), for appellants.

Norma I. Lopez, New York, for New York City Civil Service Commission, respondent.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Paul G. Feinman, J.), entered October 27, 2005, dismissing this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking to annul respondent Civil Service Commission's reversal of petitioners' finding that the individual respondent was psychologically disqualified from being a police officer, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The City having participated without objection in respondent Commission's de novo evidentiary hearing, the sole question before us is whether the Commission's determination to reinstate the individual respondent to the eligible list was rational (Matter of City of New York v New York City Civ. Serv. Commn., 30 AD3d 227, 228 [2006]). That determination had a rational basis in the testimony of the individual respondent and his psychologist, as well as documents in the record. The Commission heard and saw the witnesses, including the Police Department's staff psychologist, and was in the best position to judge their credibility (see Matter of Berenhaus v Ward, 70 NY2d 436, 443-444 [1987]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Saxe, Sweeny and Malone, JJ.