Nixon v. Board of Education of the Lindenhurst Union Free School District

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Nixon v. Board of Education of the Lindenhurst Union Free School District

60 A.D.2d 631, 400 N.Y.S.2d 172, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14615

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

DecidedDecember 19, 1977

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 60 A.D.2d 631 (Nixon v. Board of Education of the Lindenhurst 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

Nixon v. Board of Education of the Lindenhurst Union Free School District, 60 A.D.2d 631, 400 N.Y.S.2d 172, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14615 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to compel the board of education to reinstate petitioners to their positions as school nurse-teachers, the parties cross-appeal from an amended judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered November 7, 1977, which dismissed the amended petition. Amended judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Special Term did not abuse its discretion in denying the school district’s application to strike the amended petition. Turning to the merits, we agree that the abolition of the school nurse-teacher positions, and the creation of the noninstructional school registered nurse positions, did not violate petitioners’ rights pursuant to section 2510 of the Education Law (see Matter of Mills, 15 Ed Dept Rep 496; Matter of Henle, 11 Ed Dept [632]*632Rep 118), and that petitioners had not acquired tenure in the general elementary or secondary grade level, but rather in the special subject tenure area of school nurse-teacher (see Steele v Board of Educ., 40 NY2d 456; Matter of Bruso v Board of Educ., 53 AD2d 692; cf. 8 NYCRR 30.8 [b] [7]). Damiani, J. P., Shapiro, Mollen and O’Connor, 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, inter alia, to compel the board of education to reinstate petitioners to their positions as school nurse-teachers, the parties cross-appeal from an amended judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered November 7, 1977, which dismissed the amended petition. Amended judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Special Term did not abuse its discretion in denying the school district’s application to strike the amended petition. Turning to the merits, we agree that the abolition of the school nurse-teacher positions, and the creation of the noninstructional school registered nurse positions, did not violate petitioners’ rights pursuant to section 2510 of the Education Law (see Matter of Mills, 15 Ed Dept Rep 496; Matter of Henle, 11 Ed Dept [632]*632Rep 118), and that petitioners had not acquired tenure in the general elementary or secondary grade level, but rather in the special subject tenure area of school nurse-teacher (see Steele v Board of Educ., 40 NY2d 456; Matter of Bruso v Board of Educ., 53 AD2d 692; cf. 8 NYCRR 30.8 [b] [7]). Damiani, J. P., Shapiro, Mollen and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

60 A.D.2d 631, 400 N.Y.S.2d 172, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14615, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nixon-v-board-of-education-of-the-lindenhurst-union-free-school-district-nyappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack