Coleman v. Fischer, 81 A.D.3d 1018 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011). · Go Syfert
Coleman v. Fischer, 81 A.D.3d 1018 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
14 citation events (14 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In re the Claim of Nangreave
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · confidence medium
“Whether a claimant lost his or her employment through disqualifying misconduct presents a factual issue for the Board, and its resolution thereof will not be disturbed if supported by substantial evidence” (Matter of Jimenez [Knickerbocker Club, Inc. — Commissioner of Labor], 81 AD3d 1018, 1019 [2011] [citations omitted]; see Matter of Solomon [Bremner Food Group— Commissioner of Labor], 78 AD3d 1415, 1415 [2010]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In re the Claim of Nangreave
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · confidence medium
“Whether a claimant lost his or her employment through disqualifying misconduct presents a factual issue for the Board, and its resolution thereof will not be disturbed if supported by substantial evidence” (Matter of Jimenez [Knickerbocker Club, Inc. — Commissioner of Labor], 81 AD3d 1018, 1019 [2011] [citations omitted]; see Matter of Solomon [Bremner Food Group— Commissioner of Labor], 78 AD3d 1415, 1415 [2010]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In re the Claim of Samuels
N.Y. App. Div. · 2012 · confidence medium
The conflicting version of the incident given by claimant and the employer presented a credibility issue for resolution by the Board, which was not bound by the findings of the Administrative Law Judge in this regard (see Matter of Zaydman [Roman Roytberg, Inc., P.C. — Commissioner of Labor], 87 AD3d 1192, 1193 [2011]; Matter of Jimenez [Knickerbocker Club, Inc.— Commissioner of Labor], 81 AD3d 1018, 1019 [2011]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In re the Claim of Samuels
N.Y. App. Div. · 2012 · confidence medium
The conflicting version of the incident given by claimant and the employer presented a credibility issue for resolution by the Board, which was not bound by the findings of the Administrative Law Judge in this regard (see Matter of Zaydman [Roman Roytberg, Inc., P.C. — Commissioner of Labor], 87 AD3d 1192, 1193 [2011]; Matter of Jimenez [Knickerbocker Club, Inc.— Commissioner of Labor], 81 AD3d 1018, 1019 [2011]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In re the Claim of Marc
N.Y. App. Div. · 2012 · confidence medium
“Whether a claimant lost his or her employment through disqualifying misconduct presents a factual issue for the Board, and its resolution thereof will not be disturbed if supported by substantial evidence” (Matter of Jimenez [Knickerbocker Club, Inc. — Commissioner of Labor], 81 AD3d 1018, 1019 [2011] [citations omitted]; see Matter of Solomon [Bremner Food Group— Commissioner of Labor], 78 AD3d 1415 [2010]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of Demetrius Coleman
v.
Brian Fischer, as Commissioner of Correctional Services
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Feb 3, 2011.
81 A.D.3d 1018
Cited by 8 opinions  |  Published

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to, among other things, review a determination of respondent Commissioner of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Petitioner, an inmate, was found guilty following a tier III hearing of violating certain prison disciplinary rules in October 2009. Following a separate tier III disciplinary hearing, he was found guilty in November 2009 of violating the rule prohibiting the use of a controlled substance. Both determinations were affirmed upon administrative appeal, and this CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued. After issue was joined, Supreme Court annulled the October 2009 determination and remitted for further proceedings, and transferred that part of the petition challenging the November 2009 determination to this Court.

We confirm. The misbehavior report, documented positive urinalysis test results and the hearing testimony provide substantial evidence of petitioner’s guilt (see Matter of Stanford v Fischer, 77 AD3d 1013, 1013 [2010]; Matter of Hill v Smith, 73 AD3d 1418, 1418 [2010]). Contrary to petitioner’s argument, the chain of custody of the sample was adequately established by the information on the request for urinalysis form and the testimony of the officer who tested the sample (see Matter of Stanford v Fischer, 77 AD3d at 1014). Petitioner’s remaining arguments, to the extent they are properly before us, have been considered and found to be without merit.

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Rose, Garry and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.