Petitioner is not entitled to a trial pursuant to CPLR 7804 (h) on the issue of whether his departure from the New York City Employees' Retirement System was coerced. Even accepting his version of the facts (i.e., that respondent Stark had told him he would be fired if he did not retire), petitioner's retirement would not be deemed involuntary (see e.g. Matter of De Marco v McLaughlin,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
MATTER OF MURPHY v. CITY OF NEW YORK
35 A.D.3d 319 (2006)
827 N.Y.S.2d 46
In the Matter of JOHN J. MURPHY, Appellant-Respondent, v. CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Respondents-Appellants.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided December 28, 2006.
Decided December 28, 2006.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.
