Board of Education v. Helsby

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Board of Education v. Helsby

39 A.D.2d 604, 331 N.Y.S.2d 812, 80 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2960, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4804

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

DecidedApril 24, 1972

StatusPublished

This text of 39 A.D.2d 604 (Board of Education v. Helsby) 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. Helsby, 39 A.D.2d 604, 331 N.Y.S.2d 812, 80 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2960, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4804 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the CPLR to prohibit appellants, who constitute the Public Employment Relations Board, from entertaining an improper practice charge filed by the Half Hollow Hills Teachers Association, Inc. against petitioner, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered August 5, 1971, which granted the petition. Appeal dismissed as academic, without costs. In view of Special Term’s vacatur of the judgment appealed from, which had prohibited appellants from entertaining the improper practice charge, the appeal has been rendered moot (Matter of Julius Grossman, Inc. v. Staff, 252 App. Div. 886). Notwithstanding our dismissal, however, we wish to reaffirm our position that a properly filed charge with appellants that petitioner dismissed a teacher because of alleged union activities vests in appellants the power to determine the charge factually (Board of Educ., Cent. School Dist. No. 1, Town of Grand Is. v. Helsby, 37 A D 2d 493; see, also, Matter of City of Albany v. Helsby, 29 N Y 2d 433; Matter of Tischler v. Board of Educ., Monroe Woodbury Cent. School Dist. No. 1, 37 A D 2d 261). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Shapiro, Christ, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the CPLR to prohibit appellants, who constitute the Public Employment Relations Board, from entertaining an improper practice charge filed by the Half Hollow Hills Teachers Association, Inc. against petitioner, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered August 5, 1971, which granted the petition. Appeal dismissed as academic, without costs. In view of Special Term’s vacatur of the judgment appealed from, which had prohibited appellants from entertaining the improper practice charge, the appeal has been rendered moot (Matter of Julius Grossman, Inc. v. Staff, 252 App. Div. 886). Notwithstanding our dismissal, however, we wish to reaffirm our position that a properly filed charge with appellants that petitioner dismissed a teacher because of alleged union activities vests in appellants the power to determine the charge factually (Board of Educ., Cent. School Dist. No. 1, Town of Grand Is. v. Helsby, 37 A D 2d 493; see, also, Matter of City of Albany v. Helsby, 29 N Y 2d 433; Matter of Tischler v. Board of Educ., Monroe Woodbury Cent. School Dist. No. 1, 37 A D 2d 261). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Shapiro, Christ, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 A.D.2d 604, 331 N.Y.S.2d 812, 80 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2960, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4804, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/board-of-education-v-helsby-nyappdiv-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack