Elisofon v. Anker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Elisofon v. Anker

48 A.D.2d 924, 372 N.Y.S.2d 1007, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10200

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

DecidedJune 30, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 48 A.D.2d 924 (Elisofon v. Anker) 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

Elisofon v. Anker, 48 A.D.2d 924, 372 N.Y.S.2d 1007, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10200 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 inter alia to permanently enjoin respondents from removing petitioner as a teacher, petitioner appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered April 2, 1975, as, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination, and, inter alia, dismissed the petition. Judgment affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs. We have not considered the merits of petitioner’s argument that he acquired tenure by estoppel or acquiescence. That argument will not be before us until an appeal is taken from the disposition to be made of his proceeding to (1) review the Chancellor’s determination, made after a hearing pursuant to section 105a of the by-laws of the Board of Education of the City of New York and (2) stay his removal from his teaching position. Rabin, Acting P. J., Latham, Cohalan, Christ and Brennan, 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 permanently enjoin respondents from removing petitioner as a teacher, petitioner appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered April 2, 1975, as, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination, and, inter alia, dismissed the petition. Judgment affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs. We have not considered the merits of petitioner’s argument that he acquired tenure by estoppel or acquiescence. That argument will not be before us until an appeal is taken from the disposition to be made of his proceeding to (1) review the Chancellor’s determination, made after a hearing pursuant to section 105a of the by-laws of the Board of Education of the City of New York and (2) stay his removal from his teaching position. Rabin, Acting P. J., Latham, Cohalan, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

48 A.D.2d 924, 372 N.Y.S.2d 1007, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10200, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/elisofon-v-anker-nyappdiv-1975.