Zarinfar v. Board of Education

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Zarinfar v. Board of Education

93 A.D.3d 466, 939 N.Y.S.2d 702

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

DecidedMarch 13, 2012

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 93 A.D.3d 466 (Zarinfar 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

Zarinfar v. Board of Education, 93 A.D.3d 466, 939 N.Y.S.2d 702 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Emily Jane Goodman, J.), entered January 14, 2010, which, to the extent appealed from, denied the petition to annul respondents’ determination terminating petitioner’s employment as a probationary teacher and to direct respondents to reinstate his employment with back pay and interest, and dismissed the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner’s challenge to his termination as a probationary teacher is time-barred because it was not brought within four months of the effective date of termination (see CPLR 217 [1]; Matter of Frasier v Board of Educ. of City School Dist. of City of N.Y., 71 NY2d 763 [1988]; Kahn v New York City Dept. of Educ., 79 AD3d 521 [2010], affd 18 NY3d 457 [2012]).

[467]*467Even if the petition was timely, we would find that it was properly dismissed. Petitioner has failed to establish that the termination, which was based on unsatisfactory ratings and his failure to make recommended improvements, was for “a constitutionally impermissible purpose, violative of a statute, or done in bad faith” (Frasier, 71 NY2d at 765; see Curcio v New York City Dept. of Educ., 55 AD3d 438 [2008]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Sweeny, DeGrasse, Richter and Manzanet-Daniels, 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 (Emily Jane Goodman, J.), entered January 14, 2010, which, to the extent appealed from, denied the petition to annul respondents’ determination terminating petitioner’s employment as a probationary teacher and to direct respondents to reinstate his employment with back pay and interest, and dismissed the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner’s challenge to his termination as a probationary teacher is time-barred because it was not brought within four months of the effective date of termination (see CPLR 217 [1]; Matter of Frasier v Board of Educ. of City School Dist. of City of N.Y., 71 NY2d 763 [1988]; Kahn v New York City Dept. of Educ., 79 AD3d 521 [2010], affd 18 NY3d 457 [2012]).

[467]*467Even if the petition was timely, we would find that it was properly dismissed. Petitioner has failed to establish that the termination, which was based on unsatisfactory ratings and his failure to make recommended improvements, was for “a constitutionally impermissible purpose, violative of a statute, or done in bad faith” (Frasier, 71 NY2d at 765; see Curcio v New York City Dept. of Educ., 55 AD3d 438 [2008]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Sweeny, DeGrasse, Richter and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

93 A.D.3d 466, 939 N.Y.S.2d 702, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zarinfar-v-board-of-education-nyappdiv-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack