Brown v. Board of Education

23 A.D.2d 850, 259 N.Y.S.2d 179, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4317
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 3, 1965
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 23 A.D.2d 850 (Brown 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
Brown v. Board of Education, 23 A.D.2d 850, 259 N.Y.S.2d 179, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4317 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Opinion

In a proceeding under article 78 of the CPLR, to review the Board of Education’s determination directing that petitioner, a teacher in a junior high school, be placed on inactive status without pay because of illness, and to restore petitioner to her position, the board [851]*851appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered December 11, 1964, which granted the application and directed the board to restore petitioner to her position as a teacher, with all the rights and privileges of such position, effective as of the date she had been placed on inactive status (44 Mise 2d 466). Judgment reversed on the law, without costs, and petition dismissed, without costs. No questions of fact have been considered. The Board of Education placed petitioner on an “ inactive employee ” status without pay, pursuant to subdivision 7a of section 106 of the board’s by-laws. The board took such action without the service of charges upon petitioner and without according her a hearing; its action followed and was based upon the medical examination of the petitioner by its physicians. Petitioner contends that by the board’s action she was in effect suspended or temporarily removed from her position without charges or a hearing, in violation of law (Education Law, § 2573, subd. 5). In our opinion, the placement on inactive status was not a suspension or removal from office, with termination of rights; and, therefore, the service of charges and a hearing thereon were not required. Beldoek, P. J., Ughetta, Hill, Rabin and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
23 A.D.2d 850, 259 N.Y.S.2d 179, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4317, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brown-v-board-of-education-nyappdiv-1965.