ORDER. This is the final administrative determination in this matter. Any further review should be pursued in a judicial forum.

Similar documents
(OAL Decision: V. : COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION

6. Officials should maintain a high level of personal hygiene and should maintain a professional appearance at all times.

See Summary below for explanation of exception to calendar requirement. Michael Vukcevich, Deputy Director. New Jersey Racing Commission

Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals

COURT OF ARBITRATION FOR SPORT (CAS) Anti-doping Division XXIII Olympic Winter Games in Pyeongchang

Suspensions under the Teacher Tenure Act

Dep t of Correction v. White OATH Index No. 1461/09 (Apr. 27, 2009)

Arbitration CAS anti-doping Division (OG Rio) AD 16/006 International Olympic Committee (IOC) v. Kleber Da Silva Ramos, award of 20 August 2016

BISMARCK HOCKEY BOOSTERS DISCIPLINARY POLICY Adopted August 31st, 2016

PGA TOUR INTEGRITY PROGRAM MANUAL. Effective January 1, 2018

NON-PERSONAL HEARING THE FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION. and. Mr MARTIN SKRTEL Liverpool FC T H E D E C I S I O N A N D R E A S O N S

Arbitration CAS anti-doping Division (OG Rio) AD 16/010 International Olympic Committee (IOC) v. Gabriel Sincraian, award of 8 December 2016

Arbitration CAS 2001/A/324 Addo & van Nistelrooij / Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA), order of 15 March 2001

Arbitration CAS 2009/A/2011 Stephan Schumacher v. International Olympic Committee (IOC), award on costs of 6 May 2010

ATL L /15/2017 Pg 1 of 5 Trans ID: LCV

APPEALS COMMITTEE UPHOLDS DECISION FOR BALL STATE UNIVERSITY FORMER COACH

Arbitration CAS 2006/A/1008 Rayo Vallecano de Madrid SAD v. Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA), award of 21 August

SOUTH AFRICAN RUGBY UNION - ANTI-DOPING REGULATIONS

Arbitration CAS anti-doping Division (OG Rio) AD 16/004 International Olympic Committee (IOC) v. Silvia Danekova, award of 12 August 2016

Issued Decision UK Anti-Doping and Nigel Levine

COOK COUNTY SHERIFF'S MERIT BOARD. Docket No DECISION

ISU Disciplinary Commission. Case No Decision of the ISU Disciplinary Commission. In the matter of. against.

Arbitration CAS 2011/A/2628 Foolad Mobarakeh Sepahan FC v. Asian Football Confederation (AFC), award of 14 March 2012

DECISION ITU ARBITRATION TRIBUNAL

THE BLACK BOOK New Zealand Rugby Union

CRICKET DISCIPLINE COMMISSION REGULATIONS

NEW JERSEY SIRE STAKES STANDARDBRED DEVELOPMENT FUND P.O. Box 330, Trenton, NJ (609) , fax (609)

COASTAL CAROLINA UNIVERSITY PUBLIC INFRACTIONS DECISION SEPTEMBER 1, 2015

NEW YORK CITY OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE TRIALS AND HEARINGS

DECISION OF THE INDEPENDENT JUDICIAL OFFICER

Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber

Arbitration CAS 2012/A/2986 World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) v. Riley Salmon & Fédération Internationale de Volleyball (FIVB), award of 30 May 2013

Arbitration CAS 2015/A/4210 Karam Gaber v. United World Wrestling (FILA), award of 28 December 2015

NEW TRIER HOCKEY CLUB CODE OF CONDUCT

ONTARIO LABOUR RELATIONS BOARD

Discipline Guidance for RFU Clubs

Arbitration CAS 2008/A/1571 Nusaybindemir SC v. Turkish Football Federation (TFF) & Sirnak SC, award of 15 December 2008

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G JAMES MCCRAY, EMPLOYEE OPINION FILED AUGUST 3, 2012

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

IN THE SOUTH AFRICAN INSTITUTE FOR DRUG-FREE SPORT ANTI-DOPING DISCIPLINARY COMMITTE HELD AT HOLIDAY INN ROSEBANK RULING

Law and Legislation Committee Report 915 I Street, 1 st Floor Sacramento, CA

Panel: Mr. Kaj Hobér (Sweden), President; Prof. Richard McLaren (Canada); Mr. Michele Bernasconi (Switzerland)

Djokovic v. Atty Gen USA

If you have any questions or need additional information regarding the information that was redacted, if any, please contact:

BCAC ANTI DOPING POLICY

SAASL DISCIPLINARY RULES FOR PLAYERS AND CLUBS

RICHMOND JETS MINOR HOCKEY ASSOCIATION DISCIPLINE AND APPEAL POLICY

CODE OF CONDUCT AND DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES

Jamberoo Touch Incorporated Judiciary Rules & Procedures

SQ BY-LAWS. SQ By-Laws (amended November 2010) 1

Enid Soccer Club. Administrative Regulations. 1. Seasons. 2. Players. 3. Teams

AFL Coaches Code of Conduct

6.000 PROTEST, PENALTY BY-LAWS

Vandiver, Kellise v. Unilever

REGULATION SCHOOL DISTRICT

CORONA PONY YOUTH BASEBALL CODE OF CONDUCT & DISCIPLINARY POLICY

Arbitration CAS 2006/A/1110 PAOK FC v. Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA), award of 25 August 2006 (operative part of 13 July 2006)

LAW REVIEW APRIL 1992 CONTROL TEST DEFINES INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR OR EMPLOYEE SPORTS OFFICIAL

IN THE BARGAINING COUNCIL FOR THE CIVIL ENGINEERING INDUSTRY ( BCCEI ) HELD AT PORT ELIZABETH. In the arbitration between

USA RUGBY DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES

282) Q. Must competitive cheer and competitive dance coaches meet the requirements of IHSA By-law (Qualifications of Coaches)? A. Yes.

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN AND FOR KENT COUNTY

Disciplinary Commission. Case No Decision of the ISU Disciplinary Commission. In the matter of. against. and

before the Administrative Adjudication Division for Environmental Matters.

Authorized By: New Jersey Racing Commission, Frank Zanzuccki Executive Director

Decision. the FIBA Secretary General in accordance with Article of the FIBA Internal Regulations governing Anti-Doping in the matter

GIRL S RUGBY LEAGUE - COMPETITION RULES 2018

USA Rugby Disciplinary Regulations and Procedures. General Information and Requirements

Arbitration CAS 2015/A/4246 S.C. FC Steaua Bucuresti & Mirel Radoi v. Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA), award of 30 March 2016

JUDGEMENT. [1] The applicant, a man aged 68 this year, was employed by the. respondent for many years as a product manager.

St. Louis Youth Soccer Association, Inc. U8-U12 Rules of Play

The FA Discipline Handbook 2011/12 Season

Chesterfield Chargers Youth Football and Cheer Code of Conduct

Disciplinary Procedures For Players in Scottish Women s Football Youth Regional Leagues. Season 2016

ISU Disciplinary Commission. Case No Decision of the ISU Disciplinary Commission. In the matter of. against.

Panel: The Hon. Annabelle Bennett (Australia), Sole Arbitrator

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO

TOWN OF TYNGSBOROUGH RECREATION AND PARKS DEPARTMENT YOUTH SPORTS CODE OF CONDUCT, POLICIES, AND GUIDELINES. Table of Contents

1.1 The Applicant is Ms. Karen Pavicic ( the Athlete ), an equestrian rider from Canada.

Agenda Date: 3/18/16 Agenda Item: 3A CABLE TELEVISION

DISCIPLINE - FOUL PLAY REGULATIONS

PROPOSED SCAHA RULE CHANGES

USA RUGBY DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES

New Brunswick Rugby Union, Inc. By-laws 1. Membership Policy 2. Game Regulations

Case: 2:15-cv WOB-JGW Doc #: 1 Filed: 12/28/15 Page: 1 of 10 - Page ID#: 1

CONTACT: S. David Berst, NCAA Assistant Executive Director for Enforcement. II. Violations of NCAA legislation, as determined by committee.

Cricket Australia. Anti-Corruption Code

Decision of the Dispute Resolution Chamber

Arbitration CAS ad hoc Division (O.G. Salt Lake City) 02/003 Bassani-Antivari / International Olympic Committee (IOC), award of 12 February 2002

Beaumont Raiders Lacrosse Association Regulations

Australian Canoeing. Canoeing Competitions Bylaw. Adopted by the Board 31 October Bylaw #19

State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department

2013 NJ 4-H State Shooting Sports GENERAL RULES FOR ALL NJ 4-H SHOOTING SPORTS EVENTS

Arbitration CAS 2014/A/3785 Federación Peruana de Fútbol (FPF) v. Club Budapest Honvéd FC KFT, award of 5 June 2015

Australian Rugby Union. Code of Conduct By-Laws

1.1.1 Appeal Panel means the appeal panel appointed by the Union under the Disciplinary Rules;

LABOUR LAW. ARR 214 Theme 10

Arbitration CAS 2013/A/3227 Ukrainian Figure Skating Union (UFSU) v. International Skating Union (ISU), award of 21 January 2014

Waivers & Agreements for the CSAHA Tigers Hockey Season. A) GENERAL BEHAVIOR and OVERALL AGREEMENT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

SAN CARLOS LITTLE LEAGUE

Transcription:

In the Matter of Raymond LaPoint, East Jersey State Prison, Department of Corrections DOP DKT. NO. 2006-630 OAL DKT. NO. CSV 5590-07 (Merit System Board, decided January 16, 2008) The appeal of Raymond LaPoint, Correction Sergeant, East Jersey State Prison, Department of Corrections, 10-working day suspension, on charges, was heard by Administrative Law Judge Imre Karaszegi, Jr. who rendered his initial decision on December 3, 2007. No exceptions were filed. Having considered the record and the Administrative Law Judge s initial decision, and having made an independent evaluation of the record, the Merit System Board, at its meeting on January 16, 2008 accepted and adopted the Findings of Fact and Conclusion as contained in the attached Administrative Law Judge s initial decision. ORDER The Merit System Board finds that the action of the appointing authority in suspending the appellant was justified. The Board therefore affirms that action and dismisses the appeal of Raymond LaPoint. This is the final administrative determination in this matter. Any further review should be pursued in a judicial forum.

State of New Jersey OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW INITIAL DECISION OAL DKT. NO. CSV 03585-06 AGENCY DKT. NO. 2006-630-I RAYMOND LAPOINT, Appellant, v. EAST JERSEY STATE PRISON, Respondent. Frank M. Crivelli, Esq., representing Raymond LaPoint Julio Marenco, Employee Relations Officer, appearing pursuant to N.J.A.C. 1:1-5.4(a)2, for respondent East Jersey State Prison Record Closed: February 26, 2007 Decided: March 13, 2007 BEFORE IMRE KARASZEGI, JR., ALJ: STATEMENT OF THE CASE The respondent, East Jersey State Prison (Prison), brings a major disciplinary action against appellant, Raymond LaPoint (LaPoint), a Corrections Department Sergeant, suspending him for ten days. Prison alleges conduct

unbecoming an employee and other sufficient cause, specifically, violation of the New Jersey Department of Corrections policy prohibiting racial and/or sexual harassment, discrimination and/or retaliation. LaPoint denies the allegations and requests dismissal of the charges. PROCEDURAL HISTORY On April 22, 2005, Prison prepared a Preliminary Notice of Disciplinary Action against LaPoint. On June 16, 2005, Prison held a departmental hearing and on July 1, 2005, issued a Final Notice of Disciplinary Action sustaining the charges of conduct unbecoming an employee and violation of the New Jersey Department of Corrections policy prohibiting racial and/or sexual harassment, discrimination and/or retaliation. The Merit System Board transmitted the matter after LaPoint s August 11, 2005 request for a hearing, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 52:14B-1 to -15 and N.J.S.A. 52:14F-1 to -13, to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL), which filed it for hearing and determination as a contested case on March 29, 2006. I heard the matter on February 26, 2007 at which time the record closed. FINDINGS OF FACT General Background Information Raymond LaPoint is employed by the Department of Corrections at East Jersey State Prison as a corrections sergeant. Prison has indicated that Latasha Walker has made statements as to the alleged actions of LaPoint and is the only person with personal knowledge of such actions. However, Prison advises that Ms. Walker is not cooperating and has refused to attend OAL hearings scheduled on May 12, 2006 and this date, February 26, 2007. Prison states that it has reached out to her on numerous occasions but Ms. Walker continues to be a no show. Prison concedes that it cannot produce Walker

and that accordingly, the matter should not go forward since it cannot sustain its burden. Prison has no witnesses to present. Therefore, Prison is requesting a dismissal with prejudice. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Civil Service Act and the regulations promulgated there under, govern the rights and duties of public employees. N.J.S.A. 11A:1-1 to 12 6; N.J.A.C. 4A:1-1.1 to 4A:10-3.2. An employee who commits a wrongful act related to his or her duties or who gives other just cause, may be subject to major discipline. N.J.S.A.11A:2-6, 11A:2-20; N.J.A.C. 4A:2-2.2, -2.3(a). In an appeal such as this from a disciplinary action that resulted in a ten day suspension, the burden of proof is on the appointing authority. N.J.S.A. 11A:2.21; N.J.A.C. 4A:2-1.4(a). The authority has the burden of proving the charges upon which it relied by a preponderance of the competent, relevant, and credible evidence. Atkinson v. Parsekian, 37 N.J. 143 (1962); In re Polk, 90 N.J. 550 (1982). Based upon all of the foregoing, I CONCLUDE that Prison, by its own admission, cannot prove any of the charges by a preponderance of the credible evidence. Accordingly, I DISMISS all of the charges against LaPoint with prejudice. ORDER It is ORDERED that the charges against LaPoint be DISMISSED and that Prison reimburse LaPoint for the ten days that he was suspended. I hereby FILE my initial decision with the MERIT SYSTEM BOARD for consideration. This recommended decision may be adopted, modified or rejected by the MERIT SYSTEM BOARD, which by law is authorized to make a final decision in

this matter. If the Merit System Board does not adopt, modify or reject this decision within forty-five days and unless such time limit is otherwise extended, this recommended decision shall become a final decision in accordance with N.J.S.A. 52:14B-10. Within thirteen days from the date on which this recommended decision was mailed to the parties, any party may file written exceptions with the DIRECTOR, MERIT SYSTEM PRACTICES AND LABOR RELATIONS, UNIT H, DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL, 44 South Clinton Avenue, PO Box 312, Trenton, New Jersey 08625-0312, marked "Attention: Exceptions." A copy of any exceptions must be sent to the judge and to the other parties. March 13, 2007 DATE IMRE KARASZEGI, JR., ALJ Date Received at Agency: Mailed to Parties: DATE cml OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW