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.
IN RE: Yolanda STRONG, Petitioner-Respondent, v. The NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, Respondent-Appellant.
Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Leland G. DeGrasse, J.), entered August 19, 2008, which granted petitioner's application to annul the determination of respondent Department of Education terminating petitioner's probationary employment as a per diem substitute teacher, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the application denied and the petition dismissed. Appeal from order, same court (Walter B. Tolub, J.), entered August 19, 2008, which, insofar as appealed from, denied respondent's motion to reargue, unanimously dismissed, without costs.
The proceeding is time-barred as it was commenced more than four months after respondent informed petitioner of its determination that she had violated its regulations by using force as a disciplinary technique, and that her name would “remain on the Ineligible Inquiry list, terminating [her] services with [respondent]” (CPLR 217[1] ). Petitioner's time to commence the proceeding was not extended by her administrative appeal of this determination (Matter of Frasier v. Board of Educ. of City School Dist. of City of N.Y., 71 N.Y.2d 763, 766-767, 530 N.Y.S.2d 79, 525 N.E.2d 725 [1988] ). In any event, respondent's finding that petitioner engaged in corporeal punishment is not arbitrary and capricious (see Von Gizycki v. Levy, 3 A.D.3d 572, 574, 771 N.Y.S.2d 174 [2004] ), and the finding of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that petitioner did not engage in corporeal punishment lacks preclusive effect (Labor Law § 623[2]; Wooten v. New York City Dept. of Gen. Servs., 207 A.D.2d 754, 754, 617 N.Y.S.2d 3 [1994], lv. denied 84 N.Y.2d 813, 622 N.Y.S.2d 915, 647 N.E.2d 121 [1995] ).
Thank you for your feedback!
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 26, 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)