Clark v. Schriro , 935 N.Y.2d 887 ( 2012 )


Menu:
  • Supreme Court properly found that since respondents were not required to provide petitioner with a hearing within a specifically prescribed period, but only within a “reasonable time” (NY City Charter § 1046 [c] [1]), their failure to do so for more than a year after charging petitioner with misconduct did not constitute failure to fulfill a nondiscretionary duty or perform a purely ministerial act. Accordingly, the petition did not plead an action for mandamus to compel (see Matter of Gar*484rison Protective Servs. v Office of Comptroller of City of N.Y., 92 NY2d 732, 736 [1999]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, Andrias, Saxe and Freedman, JJ.

Document Info

Citation Numbers: 91 A.D.3d 483, 935 N.Y.2d 887

Filed Date: 1/12/2012

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 11/1/2024