Melnick v. Board of Education

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Melnick v. Board of Education

104 A.D.2d 943, 480 N.Y.S.2d 560, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20383

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

DecidedOctober 15, 1984

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 104 A.D.2d 943 (Melnick v. Board of Education) 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

Melnick v. Board of Education, 104 A.D.2d 943, 480 N.Y.S.2d 560, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20383 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination to terminate petitioner’s probationary service, the appeal is from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Pino, J.), dated April 25, 1983, as dismissed the proceeding.

Judgment affirmed, insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

After reviewing the record, we find that petitioner’s period of probationary service commenced on February 1, 1979. There was no undue delay by respondents in appointing petitioner to his position, and accordingly, we decline to hold that he was entitled to receive probationary credit prior to his formal appointment by the Board (cf. Ricca v Board of Educ., 47 NY2d 385). Petitioner therefore could not have acquired tenure by estoppel at the time of his dismissal and his employment was subject to termination upon recommendation of the Superintendent (Matter of Pascal v Board of Educ., 100 AD2d 622). Lazer, J. P., Thompson, Weinstein and Eiber, 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 to review a determination to terminate petitioner’s probationary service, the appeal is from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Pino, J.), dated April 25, 1983, as dismissed the proceeding.

Judgment affirmed, insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

After reviewing the record, we find that petitioner’s period of probationary service commenced on February 1, 1979. There was no undue delay by respondents in appointing petitioner to his position, and accordingly, we decline to hold that he was entitled to receive probationary credit prior to his formal appointment by the Board (cf. Ricca v Board of Educ., 47 NY2d 385). Petitioner therefore could not have acquired tenure by estoppel at the time of his dismissal and his employment was subject to termination upon recommendation of the Superintendent (Matter of Pascal v Board of Educ., 100 AD2d 622). Lazer, J. P., Thompson, Weinstein and Eiber, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

104 A.D.2d 943, 480 N.Y.S.2d 560, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20383, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/melnick-v-board-of-education-nyappdiv-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack