Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Thomas BLACK, Petitioner-Respondent, v. The NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, et al., Respondents-Appellants.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered April 10, 2008, which granted the petition and directed respondents to reinstate petitioner to his former position at the appropriate rate of pay, including all appropriate benefits, to pay petitioner past wages that he would have received, with interest, and to remove his name from the Ineligible/Inquiry list, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the petition denied and the proceeding dismissed.
Petitioner failed to establish that the termination of his probationary employment under his physical education license, which was based on his alleged inappropriate sexual relationship with a New York City public high school student, “was for a constitutionally impermissible purpose, violative of a statute, or done in bad faith” (Matter of Frasier v. Board of Educ. of City School Dist. of City of N.Y., 71 N.Y.2d 763, 765, 530 N.Y.S.2d 79, 525 N.E.2d 725 [1988]; see e.g. Curcio v. New York City Dept. of Educ., 55 A.D.3d 438, 866 N.Y.S.2d 73 [2008] ). Contrary to petitioner's contention, this issue was preserved inasmuch as respondent raised it in the answer to the petition.
The Chancellor's determinations to terminate petitioner's license, give him an unsatisfactory rating and place him on the Ineligible/Inquiry list were not arbitrary and capricious (see Matter of Andersen v. Klein, 50 A.D.3d 296, 854 N.Y.S.2d 710 [2008]; Matter of Watkins v. New York City Dept. of Educ., 48 A.D.3d 339, 851 N.Y.S.2d 541 [2008], lv. denied 10 N.Y.3d 713, 861 N.Y.S.2d 274, 891 N.E.2d 309 [2008]; Matter of Von Gizycki v. Levy, 3 A.D.3d 572, 574, 771 N.Y.S.2d 174 [2004] ).
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: May 12, 2009
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)