Board of Education v. Board of Education

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Board of Education v. Board of Education

289 A.D.2d 435, 735 N.Y.S.2d 407, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12904

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

DecidedDecember 24, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 289 A.D.2d 435 (Board of Education 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

Board of Education v. Board of Education, 289 A.D.2d 435, 735 N.Y.S.2d 407, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12904 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action for tuition reimbursement pursuant to Education Law § 3202 (4), the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), dated June 1, 2001, as denied that branch of its motion which was for summary judgment on its first cause of action.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and that branch of the motion which was for summary judgment on the first cause of action is granted.

[436]*436The plaintiff demonstrated its prima facie entitlement to summary judgment on its first cause of action, which was for tuition reimbursement with respect to Cecilia Vitale pursuant to Education Law § 3202 (4). As such, the defendant had the burden of establishing, through admissible evidentiary proof, the existence of a triable issue of fact. Here, the defendant’s opposition failed to meet that burden, as it was devoid of any evidentiary support for its assertions. Accordingly, that branch of the motion which was for summary judgment on the first cause of action should have been granted (see, Board of Educ. v Board of Educ., 262 AD2d 439; North Babylon Union Free School Dist. v Brentwood Union Free School Dist., 246 AD2d 634; Three Vil. Cent. School Dist. v Brentwood Union Free School Dist., 167 AD2d 385). Goldstein, J. P., McGinity, H. Miller and Townes, JJ., concur.

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

In an action for tuition reimbursement pursuant to Education Law § 3202 (4), the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), dated June 1, 2001, as denied that branch of its motion which was for summary judgment on its first cause of action.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and that branch of the motion which was for summary judgment on the first cause of action is granted.

[436]*436The plaintiff demonstrated its prima facie entitlement to summary judgment on its first cause of action, which was for tuition reimbursement with respect to Cecilia Vitale pursuant to Education Law § 3202 (4). As such, the defendant had the burden of establishing, through admissible evidentiary proof, the existence of a triable issue of fact. Here, the defendant’s opposition failed to meet that burden, as it was devoid of any evidentiary support for its assertions. Accordingly, that branch of the motion which was for summary judgment on the first cause of action should have been granted (see, Board of Educ. v Board of Educ., 262 AD2d 439; North Babylon Union Free School Dist. v Brentwood Union Free School Dist., 246 AD2d 634; Three Vil. Cent. School Dist. v Brentwood Union Free School Dist., 167 AD2d 385). Goldstein, J. P., McGinity, H. Miller and Townes, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

289 A.D.2d 435, 735 N.Y.S.2d 407, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12904, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/board-of-education-v-board-of-education-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack