NJ Civil Service Navigator

Jacqueline Coley, CSC Docket No. 2021-535

NJ Civil Service Commission decision of May 1, 2024, CSC Docket No. 2021-535: discipline, settlement acknowledged. Jacqueline Coley, Principal Clerk Transcriber, Plainfield, Fire Department, removal, effective November 2, 2020, on charges of incompetency, inefficiency, or failure to perform duties,

Commission decisions · Meeting of May 1, 2024

Jacqueline Coley, Principal Clerk Transcriber, Plainfield, Fire Department, removal, effective November 2, 2020, on charges of incompetency, inefficiency, or failure to perform duties, insubordination, conduct unbecoming a public employee, neglect of duty, and other sufficient cause.

Matter
Discipline
Decided
May 1, 2024, item A-2
Outcome
Settlement acknowledged
ALJ's recommendation
Reverse the removal.
Penalty appealed
removal
Title
PRINCIPAL CLERK TRANSCRIBER
Employer
Plainfield
Chair at the time
Allison Chris Myers, Acting Chairperson
Official decision
CSC's PDF

Action recorded in the minutes: The Civil Service Commission rejected the initial decision and acknowledged the settlement.

This docket at the Commission

  1. April 10, 2024, item A-2Held over to a later meetingThe Civil Service Commission directed that this matter be held over.
  2. May 1, 2024, item A-2Settlement acknowledgedThe Civil Service Commission rejected the initial decision and acknowledged the settlement.

The decision

CSC published this decision as a scanned image. The text below was recognized by OCR, read twice and checked against the meeting minutes, but OCR can misread a word. The official document is the record.

BackgroundThe appeal of Jacqueline Coley, Principal Clerk Transcriber, Plainfield, Fire Department, removal, effective November 2, 2020, on charges, was heard by Administrative Law Judge Wiliam J. Courtney (ALJ), who rendered his initial decision on February 22, 2024. Exceptions were filed on behalf of the appointing authority.

AnalysisHaving considered the record and the attached ALJ’s initial decision, and having made an independent evaluation of the record, the Civil Service Commission (Commission), at its meeting on May 1, 2024, rejected the recommendation contained in the ALJ’s initial decision and acknowledged the attached settlement.

In this matter, the parties had contacted the Commission subsequent to the issuance of the ALJ’s initial decision. Specifically, the parties indicated that they had settled the matter and forwarded the settlement to the Commission for review and acknowledgment. The policy of the judicial system strongly favors settlement. See Nolan v. Lee Ho, 120 N.J. 465 (1990); Honeywell v. Bubb, 1380 N.J. Super. 130 (App. Div. 1974); Jannarone v. W.T. Co., 65 N.d. Super. 472 (App. Div. 1961), cert. denied, 35 N.J. 61 (1961}. This policy is equally applicable in the administrative area. A settlement will be set aside only where there is fraud or other compelling circumstances. The settlement provides for the appellant’s reinstatement through December 31, 2024, with back pay and counsel fees. It was also agreed that the appellant would retire at that time. Upon review of the settlement, the Commission finds that it complies with Civil Service law and rules. As such, the Commission rejects the initial decision and acknowledges the settlement.

ORDER

The Civil Service Commission rejects the initial decision and acknowledges the settlement.

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

Decisions this one cites

  • Nolan v. Lee Ho 120 N.J. 465

About this page

Not an official copy. The decision of record is CSC's PDF. The text above was extracted from it by OCR and may differ in layout or, rarely, in a character.

Names appear as the Commission published them in its public minutes and decisions, initials where it used initials. This site does not offer a search by a person's name.

The labels are ours. The kind of matter and the outcome are our reading of the minutes; the ACTION text the Commission recorded is quoted verbatim above. A decision applies the rules to its own facts and is not a prediction for any other matter, and nothing here is legal advice.

To report an error on this page, use the contact form.