Matter of Razor v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Razor v. City of New York

2017 NY Slip Op 932, 147 A.D.3d 453, 48 N.Y.S.3d 20

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

DecidedFebruary 7, 2017

Docket3013 101079/13

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 932 (Matter of Razor v. City of New York) 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 Razor v. City of New York, 2017 NY Slip Op 932, 147 A.D.3d 453, 48 N.Y.S.3d 20 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Doris Ling-Cohan, J.), entered April 9, 2015, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denying respondents’ cross motion to dismiss the petition, granting the petition to the extent it annulled respondents’ April 3, 2013 determination denying petitioner’s appeal of his U-rating, and directing respondent Board of Education to expunge the rating and replace it with an “S” rating, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the petition denied, and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 dismissed.

Petitioner failed to preserve the issue of whether the U-rating should have been annulled based on an alleged procedural deficiency or deviation from the collective bargaining agreement negotiated by his union regarding observation *454 practices, since he never raised the issue at the administrative level (see e.g. Matter of Bottom v Annucci, 26 NY3d 983, 985 [2015]; Green v New York City Police Dept., 34 AD3d 262, 263 [1st Dept 2006]).

Petitioner has failed to show that the U-rating was arbitrary and capricious, or made in bad faith.

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

Concur — Tom, J.P., Renwick, Saxe, Fein-man and Gesmer, JJ.

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

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Doris Ling-Cohan, J.), entered April 9, 2015, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denying respondents’ cross motion to dismiss the petition, granting the petition to the extent it annulled respondents’ April 3, 2013 determination denying petitioner’s appeal of his U-rating, and directing respondent Board of Education to expunge the rating and replace it with an “S” rating, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the petition denied, and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 dismissed.

Petitioner failed to preserve the issue of whether the U-rating should have been annulled based on an alleged procedural deficiency or deviation from the collective bargaining agreement negotiated by his union regarding observation *454 practices, since he never raised the issue at the administrative level (see e.g. Matter of Bottom v Annucci, 26 NY3d 983, 985 [2015]; Green v New York City Police Dept., 34 AD3d 262, 263 [1st Dept 2006]).

Petitioner has failed to show that the U-rating was arbitrary and capricious, or made in bad faith.

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

Concur — Tom, J.P., Renwick, Saxe, Fein-man and Gesmer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2017 NY Slip Op 932, 147 A.D.3d 453, 48 N.Y.S.3d 20, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-razor-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack