BenchNOTES Newsletter

OATH News

Job opportunities at OATH: OATH regularly posts employment opportunities on the NYC Jobs portal and on its website. View current openings.

COVID-19 Update

Pursuant to an order of the Chief Administrative Law Judge, hearings, trials, and other OATH operations are available by telephone, videoconferencing, online, or mail. In-person appearances are also available. For more information, visit OATH's website at www.nyc.gov/oath.

Trials Division

Personnel

Suspension recommended for steamfitter who was discourteous to supervisor.

Supervising ALJ Joan R. Salzman recommended a 15-day suspension for a steamfitter who was discourteous to his supervisor on two occasions and uttered an anti-Latino insult to express dissatisfaction with his supervisor. Although the employee was also Latino, his remark was offensive and unacceptable workplace behavior.

Dep’t of Citywide Administrative Services v. Velez, OATH Index No. 55/23 (Jan. 9, 2023).

Licensing

ALJ recommends revoking taxi driver’s license.

ALJ Faye Lewis recommended revoking a taxi driver’s TLC license based upon his conviction for driving while ability impaired by alcohol.

Taxi & Limousine Comm’n v. Perez, OATH Index No. 1015/23 (Jan. 12, 2023), adopted, Comm’r Dec. (Jan. 25, 2023).

Appeals Division Decisions
(Appeals from the Hearings Division)

The Appeals Division reversed a hearing decision dismissing a Health Code violation against a synagogue for operating a food service establishment (“FSE”) without a permit, obstructing an inspection, and numerous food-related violations. The hearing officer dismissed the summons, finding that the synagogue did not qualify as an FSE because it only served food to its members and not the public. The Appeals Division reversed, finding that the Health Code did not require the food service operation to be open to the public to qualify as an FSE. The Appeals Division found the synagogue in violation of several health code provisions and imposed a total penalty of $6,900 for the violations. DOHMH v. Cong Sheves Achim, Appeal No. 04177 21F0 (January 23, 2023).

The Appeals Division affirmed, on different grounds, a hearing decision dismissing a violation for idling a motor vehicle engine for longer than three minutes. At the hearing, respondent asserted that the cited bus was exempt from the idling prohibition because it was idling to control the bus’s temperature for the comfort of a passenger, a child with documented medical needs. The hearing officer dismissed the charge, finding that petitioner did not prove the charge because a video of the bus taken by a citizen-complainant did not show the bus idling for more than three minutes. The Appeals Division affirmed on different grounds, finding that video is not needed to establish the idling charge, but that respondent was exempt from the idling prohibition because the idling was necessary for passenger comfort. DEP v. Leesel Transportation Corp, Appeal No. 2201341 (January 26, 2023).

BenchNOTES Newsletter