Accardo v. Board of Education

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Accardo v. Board of Education

83 A.D.2d 502, 441 N.Y.S.2d 6, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14789

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJuly 2, 1981

StatusPublished

This text of 83 A.D.2d 502 (Accardo v. Board of Education) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Accardo v. Board of Education, 83 A.D.2d 502, 441 N.Y.S.2d 6, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14789 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Evans, J.), entered October 20, 1980 in this article 78 proceeding, granting petition and directing respondent-appellant Board of Education of the City of New York to give petitioners-respondents on-the-job performance exams in accordance with the judgment of the United States District Court in Chance v Board of Educ. (330 F Supp 203, affd 458 F2d 1167, and 496 F2d 820), unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and matter remanded for trial of disputed issues of fact arising from the pleadings, including issues bearing on (a) the validity of petitioners’ appointments under [503]*503Civil Service Law and Federal court decree, and (b) the right, if any, to pay at higher title and back pay, including the issue of notice. Although the problems presented by this petition have been before the courts all too long and resolution is overdue, this factor, alone, does not justify summary disposition. The pleadings seem to create more issues than envisaged by Special Term in its decision and the record does not make clear whether the authorized procedures were followed. Under the circumstances, we have no alternative but to order a trial as above indicated. Concur — Sandler, J. P., Ross, Carro and Silverman, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Evans, J.), entered October 20, 1980 in this article 78 proceeding, granting petition and directing respondent-appellant Board of Education of the City of New York to give petitioners-respondents on-the-job performance exams in accordance with the judgment of the United States District Court in Chance v Board of Educ. (330 F Supp 203, affd 458 F2d 1167, and 496 F2d 820), unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and matter remanded for trial of disputed issues of fact arising from the pleadings, including issues bearing on (a) the validity of petitioners’ appointments under [503]*503Civil Service Law and Federal court decree, and (b) the right, if any, to pay at higher title and back pay, including the issue of notice. Although the problems presented by this petition have been before the courts all too long and resolution is overdue, this factor, alone, does not justify summary disposition. The pleadings seem to create more issues than envisaged by Special Term in its decision and the record does not make clear whether the authorized procedures were followed. Under the circumstances, we have no alternative but to order a trial as above indicated. Concur — Sandler, J. P., Ross, Carro and Silverman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

83 A.D.2d 502, 441 N.Y.S.2d 6, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14789, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/accardo-v-board-of-education-nyappdiv-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack