IN THE MATTER OF ALNESA MALLORY, CITY OF NEWARK,POLICE DEPARTMENT (NEW JERSEY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION), A-4276-15T2

Background

Alnesa Mallory, a Newark Police Department dispatcher, was charged with two counts of insubordination after a June 15, 2013 incident with her supervisor, Lt. Robert Clark.
Mallory twice asked Clark to remove/reroute an assignment in the computer dispatch system; only supervisors could remove assignments.
After Mallory entered a computer note that she had asked Clark earlier, Clark attempted to impose a procedure requiring explicit acknowledgement of requests; he says Mallory talked over him and refused to comply.
Mallory complained Clark cursed and yelled; an internal investigation led Clark to recommend formal charges. A departmental hearing upheld the charges and imposed a ten-day suspension without pay.
Mallory appealed to the Civil Service Commission; an ALJ conducted a hearing, found Mallory insubordinate, and the Commission adopted the ALJ’s findings and penalty.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Mallory committed insubordination by talking over and refusing Clark's order	Mallory denied refusing to comply; claimed the shift was hectic, she twice requested routing, and complained about Clark's misconduct	Clark and witnesses testified Mallory talked over him and refused to follow his directive about procedure and acknowledgement	Court upheld finding of insubordination; evidence supported ALJ/Commission conclusion
Whether the ALJ/Commission decision was supported by substantial credible evidence	Mallory argued findings were unsupported by the record and witnesses favored her account	Commission relied on ALJ credibility assessments and departmental rules that prohibit insubordination	Court applied deferential review and found the decision supported by substantial credible evidence
Whether ten-day suspension was arbitrary, capricious, or disproportionate	Mallory argued the penalty was excessive relative to the conduct	Commission considered prior record and progressive discipline principles and found ten days appropriate	Court held the suspension was not so disproportionate as to shock fairness; penalty upheld
Proper standard of review for agency disciplinary action	Mallory urged closer scrutiny of factual findings and sanction	Commission/City argued for deference to agency findings and sanction unless arbitrary or unsupported	Court reiterated deferential standard to agency factfinding and sanctions review and applied it in Mallory’s favor

Key Cases Cited

In re Proposed Quest Acad. Charter Schs. of Montclair Founders Grp., 216 N.J. 370 (2013) (describing limited standard for judicial review of administrative action)
In re Herrmann, 192 N.J. 19 (2007) (deference to agency decisions unless arbitrary or unsupported by substantial credible evidence)
In re Taylor, 158 N.J. 644 (1999) (deference to credibility determinations of factfinder)
In re Stallworth, 208 N.J. 182 (2011) (review of disciplinary sanctions for disproportionality)
In re Williams, 443 N.J. Super. 532 (App. Div. 2016) (definition of insubordination as failure to obey a lawful order)
City of Newark v. Natural Res. Council, 82 N.J. 530 (1980) (agency decisions presumed reasonable; basis for deference)