Matter of Lipsky v. Ferkauf Graduate School of Psychology

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Lipsky v. Ferkauf Graduate School of Psychology

127 A.D.3d 582, 8 N.Y.S.3d 105

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

DecidedApril 21, 2015

Docket14883 260209/12

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 127 A.D.3d 582 (Matter of Lipsky v. Ferkauf Graduate School of Psychology) 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

Matter of Lipsky v. Ferkauf Graduate School of Psychology, 127 A.D.3d 582, 8 N.Y.S.3d 105 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Julia I. Rodriguez, J.), entered December 12, 2013, after a nonjury trial, denying the petition to annul respondent’s determination, dated November 21, 2011, which dismissed petitioner from its clinical health Ph.D. program, and dismissing the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Respondents’ determination dismissing petitioner from its Ph.D. program in clinical health was rational and was not arbitrary and capricious (see Matter of Susan M. v New York Law School, 76 NY2d 241, 246 [1990]; Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 NY2d 222, 231 [1974]). The record establishes that petitioner failed to comply with a number of respondents’ rules and procedures, failed to conduct herself in an ethical and professional manner, and, despite being given ample opportunities to change her behavior, includ *583 ing a detailed remediation plan that warned that she was subject to dismissal, failed to meet the expectations of the school.

The penalty does not shock our sense of fairness (see Matter of Kelly v Safir, 96 NY2d 32 [2001]).

We have considered petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing.

Concur — Acosta, J.P., Saxe, Richter, Gische and Kapnick, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Julia I. Rodriguez, J.), entered December 12, 2013, after a nonjury trial, denying the petition to annul respondent’s determination, dated November 21, 2011, which dismissed petitioner from its clinical health Ph.D. program, and dismissing the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Respondents’ determination dismissing petitioner from its Ph.D. program in clinical health was rational and was not arbitrary and capricious (see Matter of Susan M. v New York Law School, 76 NY2d 241, 246 [1990]; Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 NY2d 222, 231 [1974]). The record establishes that petitioner failed to comply with a number of respondents’ rules and procedures, failed to conduct herself in an ethical and professional manner, and, despite being given ample opportunities to change her behavior, includ *583 ing a detailed remediation plan that warned that she was subject to dismissal, failed to meet the expectations of the school.

The penalty does not shock our sense of fairness (see Matter of Kelly v Safir, 96 NY2d 32 [2001]).

We have considered petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing.

Concur — Acosta, J.P., Saxe, Richter, Gische and Kapnick, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

127 A.D.3d 582, 8 N.Y.S.3d 105, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-lipsky-v-ferkauf-graduate-school-of-psychology-nyappdiv-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack