Benjamin v. New York City Board/Department of Education

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Benjamin v. New York City Board/Department of Education

105 A.D.3d 677, 964 N.Y.S.2d 139

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

DecidedApril 30, 2013

StatusPublished

This text of 105 A.D.3d 677 (Benjamin v. New York City Board/Department 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

Benjamin v. New York City Board/Department of Education, 105 A.D.3d 677, 964 N.Y.S.2d 139 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Judith J. [678]*678Gische, J.), entered on or about April 4, 2012, denying the petition seeking to vacate and annul the Hearing Officer’s award, dated April 8, 2011, which terminated petitioner’s employment with respondent as a tenured school teacher, and granting respondent’s cross motion to dismiss the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 75 and confirm the award, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Adequate evidence in the record supported the Hearing Officer’s determination that petitioner was guilty of multiple specifications charging her with failure to follow procedures and carry out normal duties, and incompetent and inefficient service during three school years (see Motor Veh. Mfrs. Assn. of U.S. v State of New York, 75 NY2d 175, 186 [1990]). The evidence showed that petitioner was either unwilling or unable to implement suggestions and constructive criticism of her ineffective teaching methods. She also continued to blame others and refused to accept any responsibility for her failure to provide a valid educational experience for her students and deliver consistently effective instruction.

Under the circumstances, the penalty of termination does not shock our sense of fairness (Lackow v Department of Educ. [or “Board”] of City of N.Y., 51 AD3d 563, 569 [1st Dept 2008]).

We have considered petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing.

Concur—Acosta, J.E, Moskowitz, Renwick, Freedman and Clark, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Judith J. [678]*678Gische, J.), entered on or about April 4, 2012, denying the petition seeking to vacate and annul the Hearing Officer’s award, dated April 8, 2011, which terminated petitioner’s employment with respondent as a tenured school teacher, and granting respondent’s cross motion to dismiss the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 75 and confirm the award, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Adequate evidence in the record supported the Hearing Officer’s determination that petitioner was guilty of multiple specifications charging her with failure to follow procedures and carry out normal duties, and incompetent and inefficient service during three school years (see Motor Veh. Mfrs. Assn. of U.S. v State of New York, 75 NY2d 175, 186 [1990]). The evidence showed that petitioner was either unwilling or unable to implement suggestions and constructive criticism of her ineffective teaching methods. She also continued to blame others and refused to accept any responsibility for her failure to provide a valid educational experience for her students and deliver consistently effective instruction.

Under the circumstances, the penalty of termination does not shock our sense of fairness (Lackow v Department of Educ. [or “Board”] of City of N.Y., 51 AD3d 563, 569 [1st Dept 2008]).

We have considered petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing.

Concur—Acosta, J.E, Moskowitz, Renwick, Freedman and Clark, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

105 A.D.3d 677, 964 N.Y.S.2d 139, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/benjamin-v-new-york-city-boarddepartment-of-education-nyappdiv-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack