Opinion
03-22-2016
In re TZEFANG FRANCES CHANG, Petitioner–Appellant, v. The DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OF the CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Respondents–Respondents.
Stewart Lee Karlin Law Group, P.C., New York (Daniel Dugan of counsel), for appellant. Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Emma Grunberg of counsel), for respondents.
Stewart Lee Karlin Law Group, P.C., New York (Daniel Dugan of counsel), for appellant.
Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Emma Grunberg of counsel), for respondents.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Cynthia S. Kern, J.), entered September 8, 2014, which denied the petition challenging respondents' determination, dated January 14, 2014, terminating petitioner's contract as a bilingual speech pathologist, and dismissed the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The court properly found that the agreement with petitioner afforded respondents the unconditional right to terminate the contract without cause and that such contract termination clauses are enforceable (see Red Apple Child Dev. Ctr. v Community Sch. Dists. Two, 303 A.D.2d 156, 157–158, 756 N.Y.S.2d 527 [1st Dept.2003], lv. denied 1 N.Y.3d 503, 775 N.Y.S.2d 240, 807 N.E.2d 290 [2003] ; Ying–Qi Yang v. Shew–Foo Chin, 42 A.D.3d 320, 839 N.Y.S.2d 90 [1st Dept.2007], lv. denied 9 N.Y.3d 812, 846 N.Y.S.2d 602, 877 N.E.2d 652 [2007] ). Moreover, respondents' determination was rational. The agency did not have to accept petitioner's claim that the complaint was an exaggeration of the actual events.
Petitioner was not entitled to a name-clearing hearing because she presented no evidence to refute the statements of respondent's director of employee relations that the code placed on petitioner's file was for internal use only, and therefore she failed to show a likelihood of dissemination of the stigmatizing material (see Matter of Swinton v. Safir, 93 N.Y.2d 758, 764–765, 697 N.Y.S.2d 869, 720 N.E.2d 89 [1999] ).
TOM, J.P., SAXE, RICHTER, KAPNICK, JJ., concur.