Court of Appeals of New York

In challenge to defendant's residency policy that District personnel are expected to be domiciled in Niagara Falls: 1) the policy and its implementing regulations are clear and not ambiguous; 2) the requirement is unrelated to job performance, misconduct or competency and so plaintiffs Adrian and Luchey were not entitled to hearings complying with Education Law sections 2509 (2), 3020 & 3020-a, which deal with teacher discipline; 3) defendant's notice and hearing procedures easily complied with due process; 4) defendant rationally concluded that plaintiffs Beck-Nichols and Adrian did not comply with the residency requirement; but 5) plaintiff Luchey's case is remanded to determine whether defendant's decision was arbitrary and capricious.

Appellate Information

• Decided 02/19/2013
• Published 02/19/2013

Judges

• READ

Court

• Court of Appeals of New York

Counsel