Hassildine v. Mattituck-Cutchogue Union Free School District

225 A.D.2d 623, 639 N.Y.2d 441, 639 N.Y.S.2d 441, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2172
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 11, 1996
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 225 A.D.2d 623 (Hassildine v. Mattituck-Cutchogue Union Free School District) 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
Hassildine v. Mattituck-Cutchogue Union Free School District, 225 A.D.2d 623, 639 N.Y.2d 441, 639 N.Y.S.2d 441, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2172 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Opinion

[624]*624The informal hearing conducted by the respondent Board of Education (hereinafter the Board) in this case was not a quasi-judicial evidentiary hearing mandated by law. Therefore, the standard of review to be applied in this proceeding is whether the Board’s determination was arbitrary and capricious or affected by error of law, not whether the determination was supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Scherbyn v Wayne-Finger Lakes Bd. of Coop. Educ. Servs., 77 NY2d 753, 757-758; Matter of 125 Bar Corp. v State Liq. Auth., 24 NY2d 174, 178-179; Matter of Colton v Berman, 21 NY2d 322, 329; CPLR 7803 [4]). Consequently, the Supreme Court improperly transferred the proceeding to this Court. However, because the record is sufficient to permit review, we will determine the issues raised (see, CPLR 7804 [g]; Matter of 125 Bar Corp. v State Liq. Auth., supra, at 180).

The Board’s determination that the petitioner was not eligible for retroactive membership in the retirement system had a rational basis and was not arbitrary and capricious. Therefore, it should not be set aside. O’Brien, J. P., Santucci, Altman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Spata v. Levy
306 A.D.2d 534 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Kendall v. Board of Education of South Orangetown Central School District
253 A.D.2d 496 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Zinman v. Board of Education
248 A.D.2d 716 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Candrea v. Board of Education of Yonkers City School District
236 A.D.2d 536 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Clark v. Board of Education for the Kingston City School District
236 A.D.2d 709 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
225 A.D.2d 623, 639 N.Y.2d 441, 639 N.Y.S.2d 441, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2172, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hassildine-v-mattituck-cutchogue-union-free-school-district-nyappdiv-1996.