From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Facey v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Educ.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Apr 16, 2013
105 A.D.3d 547 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)

Opinion

2013-04-16

In re Paulet FACEY, Petitioner–Appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, Respondent–Respondent.

Paulet Facey, appellant pro se. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Elizabeth I. Freedman of counsel), for respondent.



Paulet Facey, appellant pro se. Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Elizabeth I. Freedman of counsel), for respondent.
MAZZARELLI, J.P., DEGRASSE, ABDUS–SALAAM, MANZANET–DANIELS, CLARK, JJ.

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen A. Rakower, J.), entered March 22, 2012, which denied the petition to vacate an arbitration award finding petitioner guilty of certain charges, imposing a fine of $8,000 and directing that petitioner receive up to 48 hours of pedagogical training, confirmed the arbitration award and dismissed the proceeding, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The record supports the findings of misconduct committed by petitioner, including making a remark comparing the elementary school where she worked “to the shootings and killings of individuals in the Iraq war.” Moreover, while uttering the remark, she stood up and feigned pulling the trigger of a gun, which was worrisome to her colleagues. There exists no basis to disturb the credibility determinations of the arbitrator ( see Matter of Lackow v. Department of Educ. of the City of N.Y., 51 A.D.3d 563, 568, 859 N.Y.S.2d 52 [1st Dept. 2008] ).

The arbitrator's reference to petitioner's miming of shooting a gun flowed naturally from the credited witnesses' testimony, and did not go beyond what the arbitrator was authorized to hear. Furthermore, the charges preferred against petitioner specifically notified her of the misconduct that she was accused of and were sufficiently specific to permit petitioner to prepare her defense ( see Matter of Block v. Ambach, 73 N.Y.2d 323, 333, 540 N.Y.S.2d 6, 537 N.E.2d 181 [1989] ).

The penalty imposed does not shock our sense of fairness, and in fact was well-tailored to the misconduct of which petitioner was found guilty of ( see generally Matter of Pell v. Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 N.Y.2d 222, 233, 356 N.Y.S.2d 833, 313 N.E.2d 321 [1974] ).


Summaries of

Facey v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Educ.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Apr 16, 2013
105 A.D.3d 547 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
Case details for

Facey v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Educ.

Case Details

Full title:In re Paulet FACEY, Petitioner–Appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Apr 16, 2013

Citations

105 A.D.3d 547 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
105 A.D.3d 547
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 2509

Citing Cases

Acevedo v. Fire Dep't

E.g., Guiterrez v. Rhea, 105 AD3d 481, 486 (1st Dep't 2013); Wolfe v. Kelly, 79 AD3d 406, 410-11 (1st Dep't…

Ward-Bourne v. Dep't of Educ. of N.Y.

Accordingly, given the record and the petitioner's conduct, this court concludes that the penalty of a…