Bonfield v. Board of Education

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bonfield v. Board of Education

71 A.D.2d 604, 418 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12810

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

DecidedJuly 2, 1979

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 71 A.D.2d 604 (Bonfield 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

Bonfield v. Board of Education, 71 A.D.2d 604, 418 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12810 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to compel respondents to reinstate petitioners as full-time tenured teachers within the East Ramapo Central School District, petitioner Cohen appeals from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, dated June 22, 1978, as dismissed the proceeding as to her, upon the ground that it was time barred. Judgment affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements. We find no error in Special Term’s holding that this proceeding was not instituted in compliance with the provisions of CPLR 217. We note, however, that had we been able to reach the merits of the proceeding, the appellant would have been entitled to relief under this court’s decision in Matter of Schlosser v Board of Educ. (62 AD2d 207, affd 47 NY2d 811). Lazer, J. P., Margett, Martuscello and Mangano, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to compel respondents to reinstate petitioners as full-time tenured teachers within the East Ramapo Central School District, petitioner Cohen appeals from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, dated June 22, 1978, as dismissed the proceeding as to her, upon the ground that it was time barred. Judgment affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements. We find no error in Special Term’s holding that this proceeding was not instituted in compliance with the provisions of CPLR 217. We note, however, that had we been able to reach the merits of the proceeding, the appellant would have been entitled to relief under this court’s decision in Matter of Schlosser v Board of Educ. (62 AD2d 207, affd 47 NY2d 811). Lazer, J. P., Margett, Martuscello and Mangano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

71 A.D.2d 604, 418 N.Y.S.2d 1018, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12810, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bonfield-v-board-of-education-nyappdiv-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack