Labor & Employment Law

New York City employee dismissed for not having a residence in New York City

By Harvey Randall, Esq.

New York City employee dismissed for not having a residence in New York City
Matter of Prendergast v City of New York, 44 A.D.3d 414, Appellate Division, First Department

The New York City Human Resources Administration (HRA) told James A. Prendergast that his employment was terminated because he was not a resident of the City of New York as required by City?s Administrative Code §2-120.

The Appellate Division sustained HRA?s decision, noting that it was ?not arbitrary or capricious, nor was it irrational or an abuse of discretion.?

According to the decision, Prendergast?s evidence failed to demonstrate that he resided within the City. It merely showed that that he received much of his mail at a post office box in a Post Office in the Borough of Queens. Apparently Prendergast began using the post office box after learning of HRA?s investigation into his residency. The court characterized his explanation for receiving mail at the post office box address as ?demonstrably false.?

Significantly, Prendergast was never seen at the dwelling in Queens that he claim was his residence. In addition, the court noted that he refused to allow HRA investigators to come to ?his Queens home? to prove that he had access to that residence. According to the decision, Prendergast?s ?Queens home? was occupied by another individual.

Under these circumstances, said the Appellate Division, HRA?s determination that Prendergast did not reside at the Queens residence had a rational basis.

Full post as published by New York Public Personnel Law on May 06, 2008 (boomark / email).