Matter of Buenzow v. Lewiston-Porter Cent. Sch. Dist.

474 N.E.2d 1194, 64 N.Y.2d 676, 485 N.Y.S.2d 526, 1984 N.Y. LEXIS 4908
New York Court of Appeals·Decided December 11, 1984·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the opinion of Justice Stewart F. Hancock, Jr. We add only that a literal application of section 3014-b of the Education Law — advocated by neither party to this appeal — could have anomalous and, we believe, unintended consequences, for example, the automatic transfer of senior BOCES teachers, against their wish, to school districts where no positions are available, even where their BOCES positions remain available. Clarification by the Legislature could help avoid such consequences (see, e.g., Matter of Acinapuro v Board of Coop. Educational Servs., 89 AD2d 329, 339).

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Meyer, Simons and Kaye concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

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

Matter of Buenzow v. Lewiston-Porter Cent. Sch. Dist., 474 N.E.2d 1194, 64 N.Y.2d 676, 485 N.Y.S.2d 526, 1984 N.Y. LEXIS 4908 (N.Y. 1984).

474 N.E.2d 1194 (Matter of Buenzow v. Lewiston-Porter Cent. Sch. Dist.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bojarczuk v. Mills
287 A.D.2d 82 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Herrman v. Board of Education
194 A.D.2d 673 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
Anderson v. Cortland City School District
147 Misc. 2d 7 (New York Supreme Court, 1990)